CHAPTER XXXII
THE SOUDAN WAR (_Continued_)
X. THE EFFECT OF THE ACTION OF WAD HABESHI
The proximate result of the fight of the _Safieh_ was of course the
fulfilment of its immediate object, the rescue of Sir Charles Wilson's
gallant detachment. But, years afterwards, it was made known that the
full effect actually extended so far as to include the salvation of the
whole Desert Column. In _The Royal Navy: A History_, vol. vii., Sir
William Laird Clowes briefly mentions the fact, referring to Sir F. R.
Wingate's letter to Lord Wolseley of 18th March, 1893. The passages in
that letter to which he refers are as follows:
"... It is therefore on these grounds only that I have ventured to
collate evidence on an episode which may be considered to have been
finally dealt with.... Moreover, with the light which this evidence
throws on the situation, the results of Beresford's action cannot but
be enhanced ... that he was the means of saving Sir C. Wilson and his
party is an admitted fact; but when it is realised that added to this,
his action really saved the Column, it is, I consider, my duty to bring
before you this evidence which, had it been known at the time, might
have secured for Beresford and Benbow the greatest reward soldiers and
sailors can hope to obtain. But late as it is, it may not be too late
for the question to be reopened....
"In order to arrive at the actual details of the Dervish movements
subsequent to the fall of Khartoum, a meeting {310} was held at the
Intelligence Department, Egyptian Army, Cairo, on the 23rd February,
1893, at which the following were present, namely, Father Orhwalder,
Kasha el Mus Pasha, Major Hassan Agha Mohammed (Kassala), Hassan Eff.
Riban (late Maowin Berber District) and present at Berber at that time;
the Emir Sheikh Medawi (one of the principal Dervish Emirs present in
the attack on Khartoum)....
"In the unanimous opinion of the above Committee, the credit of having
delayed the Dervish advance and thus enabling the British Column to be
retired safely is due to the action of Lord Charles Beresford at Wad
Habeshi...."
The following short extracts may be cited from the evidence which led
the Committee to their conclusion. The first is taken from the
statement of Esh Sheikh Murabek Wad el Tilb, a Kordofan merchant who
arrived in Cairo on 30th May, 1888, from Omdurman:
"... There were 3000 Dervishes there (at Wad Habeshi) under the Emir
Ahmed Wad Faid and Sheikh Mustafa el Amin. These Dervishes thought
they could easily capture the steamer in which there were only about 30
men, but the English stood up and fought like men for many hours, they
inflicted great loss on the Dervishes, and forced them to draw off and
disperse. Their Chief Emir was killed as well as their Artillery
Officer.
"The effect of this defeat on the Dervishes was immense, and it also
affected the whole situation. The survivors fled in many directions,
spreading the news of the English victory far and wide....
"If the Dervishes at Wad Habeshi had succeeded in capturing the
steamer, there is no doubt Nejumi would have hastened his march and
would have intercepted the English before they could have got away from
Gubat, but instead of that he halted when he heard of Wad Faid's death,
and delayed some days in consequence at Wad Bishara and at Gereishab.
He had a very large force with him ...
"(Signed) MURABEK WAD EL TILB"
{311}
The second extract is translated from the German of Father Orhwalder,
long a prisoner of the Mahdi:
"... It is an undoubted fact that Lord Charles Beresford's gallant
action at Wad Habeshi was the means of saving the lives of Sir Charles
Wilson and his party, who would have suffered a like fate to that of
Colonel Stewart and his companions, and it is an equally undoubted fact
that the Mahdi's success at Khartoum shook the fidelity of the
Shagiyeh, but Lord Charles Beresford's victory at Wad Habeshi had the
effect of making Nejumi dread meeting the English on the river, and
decided him to attack them on the desert.
"Lord Charles Beresford deserves the credit of having effected this and
was thus the means of saving the entire British force.
"(Signed) DON GUISEPPE ORHWALDER
"(23_rd February_, 1893)"
It is obvious that the estimation of the conduct of the officers and
men who fought at Wad Habeshi remains unaffected by the results of the
action, which were neither definitely contemplated nor clearly
foreseen. And the evidence I have quoted being irrelevant, strictly
speaking, to any criticism of the action itself, is here cited, not in
order to enhance the credit of the officers and men concerned but, for
the sake both of its intrinsic interest, and for the purpose of
illustrating, incidentally, the methods occasionally adopted under the
system controlling the Royal Navy.
The effect of the action at Wad Habeshi exemplifies the extraordinary
potency of the element of chance in war. Under what conceivable theory
of tactics could it have been maintained that a penny steamer had the
smallest chance of rescuing a detachment isolated in a hostile country,
upon condition of twice engaging a powerful battery at short range, and
twice defeating its garrison of sixty or a hundred to one? Or what
self-respecting tactician would have {312} predicted that in the
extremely improbable event of success, its effect would have been to
check, even momentarily, the advance by land of the main force of the
enemy?
But the unexpected happened; and as it did happen, it would have been
in accordance with a courteous precedent on the part of the authorities
to have recognised the fact. I make no complaint of their action as
regards myself; and only recall it here in the hope that no repetition
of it will be permitted in respect of others perhaps less fortunate
than I. The Admiralty refused to allow me to count my service in the
Soudan either as time spent in command of a ship of war, or, as part of
a period of command spent both in peace and war. Their Lordships'
refusal might have involved my retirement before I had completed the
time required to qualify for flag rank. The Queen's Regulations
ordained: that a captain must have completed six years' service, of
which the first three years must be in command of a ship of war at sea;
or that he must have completed four years during war; or five years, of
war and peace combined.
After having been for over two years in command of H.M.S. _Undaunted_,
I applied (in May, 1892) for permission to count the 315 days in the
Soudan during which I was borne on the books of H.M.S. _Alexandra_,
which were allowed as sea-time by the Admiralty, in the required five
years of war and peace combined. The application was refused, on the
ground that war service could not be reckoned by a captain unless he
was in command of a ship of war actually employed in active service at
sea.
Having completed my three years' service in command at sea, I applied
(in April, 1893) for permission to count the 315 days sea-time,
although they preceded the three years in command at sea, as part of
the required six years' service. The application was refused, upon the
ground that its acceptance was not necessary in order to save me from
retirement.
A year and a half afterwards (in January, 1895) I repeated my
application, pointing out that in three cases {313} the Admiralty had,
by order in council, conceded similar claims of admittedly much less
force than my own, and that the only naval officers engaged in the
Soudan war who were not allowed to count their time towards promotion
were Captain Boardman and myself. Their Lordships then merely referred
me to their previous answers. I may mention that my application was
warmly and emphatically supported by Lord Wolseley.
{314}