TEETHING PROBLEMS, 1856–1867 53
Yorke: ‘which I beg strongly to recommend to His Royal HighnessThere
are I believe few better or more gallant officers in the service than Col.
Daubeney.’^34 According to the tattered manuscript jacket that enclosed the
file, this second application was rejected by the board on 30 March 1858.
In addition to the recommendations made by commanding officers, the
War Office and Horse Guards also had to sift through a number of personal
recommendations. As with the regimental returns, these ran the spectrum
from the sincere through the self-seeking to the absurd.
Some men truly believed they had earned the recognition due to a
Victoria Cross winner through their services to Queen and country. A
lengthy petition was put forward by Lieutenant (then Colour Sergeant)
John Brophey of the 63rd Regiment requesting a VC for his services in the
Crimea. It included testimonials from no less than three captains, four lieu-
tenant colonels, the regimental surgeon, his commanding officer, Lieutenant
Colonel Dabzell, and the regimental chaplain. Also from the 63rd came the
self-recommendation of Ensign (then Sergeant) James Slack, with endorse-
ments from Lieutenant Colonel Dabzell (whose life he had saved) and from
a Lieutenant Colonel Lindsay, also apparently of the 63rd Regiment.
Both of these claims were denied when they reached the Board of
Selection.^35 Although the board did not give any specific reasons for the
rejection of the petitions (they rarely did), either of two possibilities could
explain their actions. In the clannish atmosphere of the Victorian officer
corps there was some resentment at the promotion of sergeants to the
rank of officer, and the selection board may have reflected this prejudice.
Conversely, that they had been promoted may have been seen as reward
enough. The selection board also undoubtedly took note of the fact that
while the Commanding Officer of the 63rd passed on a favorable endorse-
ment of the new officers’ claims, he did not himself recommend the men
for the VC. If he had thought them truly deserving of the award, he would
have recommended them.
This latter scenario was certainly the case in the rejection of the petition
by Lieutenant D. Sullivan of the 82nd Regiment. His petition did not even
make it to the board; the word ‘rejected’ was scrawled beneath his name
on the original submission letter. This was apparently due to a lack of
corroboration and the lack of his commanding officer’s support for the
claim. Sullivan had transferred into the 82nd from the 30th and it was in
the latter that he claimed to have shown his valour. His new commanding
officer, Lieutenant Colonel E. F. Yates, passed on the petition but in his
cover letter honestly told the Adjutant General that he knew nothing about
the action in which Sullivan claimed to have been a hero.^36
lily
(lily)
#1