# Royal Naval Biography/O'Brien, Robert

Layout 2
ROBERT O’BRIEN, Esq. Manager of the Dublin and London Steam Packet Company. [Post-Captain of 1804.]
This officer is a brother of Sir Edward O’Brien, Bart. M.P. for the county of Clare in Ireland, and representative of a family, the elder branch of which received a patent of baronetage in 1686.
He obtained the rank of Lieutenant in 1797; was made a Commander in 1800; and posted into the Clorinde frigate, at Jamaica, May 1st 1804.
Captain O’Brien’s next appointment was, about Jan. 1813, to the Doris of 42 guns; and in the course of the same year, we find him escorting the outward bound trade to China. His subsequent proceedings in the East Indies met with the marked disapprobation of the Admiralty, as will be seen by the following official letter of their Lordship’s Secretary to the senior officer on that station, dated Feb. 17, 1816:
“Sir, Having laid before my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty a letter from Captain O’Brien, dated at Madras the 7th October last, stating that in consequence of the death of Rear-Admiral Sir George Burlton, and in the absence of Captain Sayer, of H.M.S. Leda, on a distant part of the station, he had assumed the temporary command in the Indian seas, removing from his proper ship the Doris into the Wellesley, and hoisting in the latter a Broad Pendant.
“I have their Lordships’ commands to signify their direction to you to express to Captain O’Brien their Lordships’ entire disapprobation of his presuming to hoist a Broad Pendant and assume a command contrary to the Rules of the Service, and without any kind of authority for so doing, and it is their Lordships’ further direction that. Captain O’Brien be ​diately ordered to return to England in any ship in which he may be at the receipt of this letter. I am, Sir, your most humble servant,
(Signed)“John Barrow.”
“The senior officer of H.M. ships, East Indies.”
Previous to the receipt of the above. Commodore George Sayer had written to the Admiralty informing the Secretary for their Lordships’ information, that it was his intention to try Captain O’Brien by a Court-Martial, for “pursuing a course of conduct subversive of the first principles of the Service, grounded on pretensions as futile as irreconcileable with the Discipline of the Navy.” To this communication he received the following reply:
“Admiralty Office, 20th August, 1816.
“Sir,– I have received and laid before my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, your letter of the 20th March last, representing the conduct of Captain O’Brien acting in the command of H.M.S. Cornwallis, and stating that you had ordered a Court-Martial to assemble and try him for his conduct; and I am commanded by their Lordships to acquaint you that they approve of your ordering the Court-Martial in question. I am, Sir, &c,
(Signed)“John Barrow.”
“To Commodore Sayer, &c.”
Captain O’Brien’s trial commenced April 6, 1816; a Court-Martial having been assembled for that purpose on board the Cornwallis 74, at Madras, in pursuance of an order addressed to Captain Henry Weir, of the Thais, by “Commodore George Sayer, senior officer in the command of H.M.’s ships and vessels employed in the East Indies and seas adjacent.” The charges preferred against him on that occasion, were in substance as follow:
“For having carried a distinguishing Broad Pendant, and officially designated himself Commodore and Senior Officer of H.M.’s ships and vessels in the East Indies and Indian seas, in direct disregard and violation of the Naval Instructions, and in contempt and defiance of the command and authority which had devolved on Captain George Sayer, his senior officer, by the decease of Rear-Admiral Sir George Burlton, K.C.B.
“For sending to England, in the Wellesley, the leaders of a mutiny on board the Cornwallis, without reference to Commodore Sayer, the only competent authority to have taken legal measures thereon; a proceeding striking at the foundation of all discipline, and fraught with danger to his Majesty’s naval service.
​“For ordering H.M.’s brig Cameleon to be commissioned while building, aud appointing a Lieutenant to be Commander of the said vessel, an exercise of authority beyond even what was vested in the late commander-in-chief: and,
“For disrespect to the Commodore, by styling him Captain Sayer, in various orders issued to other officers of the squadron, exhibiting in himself thereby a most dangerous example of disobedience and insubordination subversive of discipline and injurious in the extreme to his Majesty’s service.”
On the llth April, Captain O’Brien having closed his defence, without producing any evidence whatever in his justification, either oral or documentary, the following sentence was read by Mr. John Stigant, Acting Judge Advocate:
“At a Court-Martial assembled on board H.M.S. Cornwallis, in Madras Roads, the 6th day of April 1816, and held by adjournment from day today (Sunday excepted) until this llth day of April, 1816.
“Present, :
| “Henry Weir, Esq. Captain of H.M.S. | Thais, President. |
| “Joseph Prior, Esq. | Acorn. |
| “Charles Shaw, Esq. | Termagant. |
| “John Allen, Esq. | Tyne. |
| “Henry Forbes, Esq. Commander of H.M. sloop Challenger. ||
[Here follows the usual preamble respecting the order for assembling the Court-Martial, &c. &c.]
“The Court having read the original documents, and certified copies in corroboration thereof, and having received the prisoner’s voluntary admission of his having taken upon himself the authority of a Commodore; and the prisoner producing no evidence in refutation of the charges exhibited against him ; and having very maturely and deliberately weighed and considered the whole and every part of the charges against him, are of opinion that the charges are proved, and do therefore adjudge him to be dismissed his Majesty’s service, and he is hereby dismissed accordingly.”
(Signed by the Members, and Acting Judge Advocate.)
The subject of this sketch returned to England as a passenger on board an indiaman, he preferring that mode of conveyance to the accommodation offered him on board a King’s ship. In Mar. 1817, he was fortunate enough to be reinstated; and in June following, we find him publishing a pamphlet wherein he says that “his immediate restoration to his rank is the best proof, that the Illustrious Character at the Head of the Government, and the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, who recommended it, have acquitted him honorably of the vile charges laid to him * * * * * *
“* * * * * * The reception he has met with at ​the Admiralty satisfies his mind that there is no loss of character there; – and although the discipline of the navy demands that the authority of Courts-Martial should be upheld, still a feeling of deep regret is manifest there, both at the constitution of the Court, its proceedings and sentence.”
Captain O’Brien having, in his preface, at p. ii., called upon the officers of the British Army and Navy to mark their decided abhorrence of the conduct of the parties concerned, but without enabling them to judge fairly for themselves, we shall close this brief notice by subjoining a copy of a letter which he had previously received from the Admiralty in answer to one from himself requesting their Lordships to determine on the legality of the Court-Martial, as well as of the sentence which had had the effect of suspending his rank in the naval service:–
“Admiralty Office, 15th Nov. 1816.
“Sir,– Having laid before my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty your letter of the 13th inst. I have it in command to acquaint you in reply, that their Lordships having examined the minutes of the Court-Martial held upon you, and considered the sentence, see no reason to doubt the legality of the same. I am, Sir,– &c.
(Signed)“John Barrow.”
“Robert O’Brien, Esq.”
Agents.– Messrs. Maude.