nted to the King a memorial, deprecating "particularly the
mischief and scandal of permitting men, _who are at once in high office
and subordinate military command_, previous to their making
recriminating accusations against their commander-in-chief, to attempt
to corrupt the public judgment by the publication of libels on their
officers in a common newspaper, thereby exciting mutiny in your
Majesty's Navy," etc. The words italicized show that this was aimed at
Palliser; and at Sandwich, who inferentially had "permitted" his action,
and ultimately rewarded him with the Governorship of Greenwich Hospital.

In this demoralized condition of professional sentiment the Admiralty
could no longer command the services of the best men. Howe came home in
disgust from America. Keppel threw up the command of the Channel Fleet,
and Barrington subsequently refused it on the expressed ground of
self-distrust, underlying which was real distrust of the ministry. He
would serve as second, but not as first. Byron, after relieving Howe in
New York, went to the West Indies, there made a failure, and so came
home in the summer of 1779. The Channel squadron fell into the hands of
men respectable, indeed, but in no way eminent, and advanced in years,
whose tenures of office were comparatively short. Hardy was sixty-three,
Geary seventy; and on both Hawke, who was friendly to them, passed the
comment that they were "too easy." The first had allowed "the discipline
of the fleet to come to nothing," and he feared the same for the other.
Not until the fall of the ministry, consequent upon Cornwallis's
surrender, was the post filled by a distinguished name, when Howe took
the command in 1782.

The Administration was thus forced back upon Rodney; fortunately for
itself, for, as far as history has since revealed, there was no other
man then in the service, and of suitable rank, exactly fitted to do the
work he did. Samuel Hood alone, then an unproved captain, and
practically in voluntary retirement, could have equalled and surpassed
him. Howe, like Rodney, was an accomplished tactician, and in conception
far in advance of the standards of the day. In his place he did
admirable service, which has been too little appreciated, and he was
fortunate in that the work which fell to him, at the first, and again at
the last of this war, was peculiarly suited to his professional
characteristics; but he was not interchangeable with Rodney. In the
latter there