The Sun.
London, England, 1870-05-12 00:00:00

FREE RUSSIA.

TC THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,—In justice to a gallant officer, who had to
conduct a difficult operation in an unknown sea,
and in completion of a curious episode in the history
of our time—the miraculous defence of Solovetsk
against au English squadron—l send you the fol-
lowing correspondence 'pith Admiral Ommaney.—
Very faithfully yours,

W. HEPWORTH DIXON.

" 6, Talbot-square,.April.29, 1870.

,
"Sir,—On perusing your work, just published, under the
title of ' Free Russia,' you have given me cause to feel
deeply grieved with the manner in which you represented
my conduct before the public, especially in chapter 13, on
the Great Miracle, respecting the operations of the White
Sea squadron at Solovetsk, in the late Russian war in
1854. You have no doubt prepared your narrative from
the statements made by the Russians, which I beg to in-
form you are not correct. I could have wished that you
had conferred with me and heard my version of that
affair, before putting forth such inaccuracies, which
seriously affect my reputation.
" I infer from what you have written that the Russians
concealed from you the facts connected with the military
character of Solovetsk, and that they opened fire upon her
Majesty's ships which were approaching the anchroage of
Solovetsk with peaceful intentions, and desirous of respect-
ing the sacred character of the place.
" I shall be glad to give you the full particulars of all
that occurred, and can show you that we were fully justi-
fied in the act of retribution which we were compelled to
inflict for the unprovoked insult to the British flag.
" Having thus publicly exposed my conduct to the criticism
of the world, and traduced the characters of British
officers who had a painful duty to discharge, at the same
time I feel sure that you have done so unintentionally ;
but I must be allowed to appeal to your generosity, and
ask you to take an opportunity to set me right before the
public.—l am, sir, your most obedient servant,
" ERASMUS, OMMANEY, Vice-Admiral.
" W. Hepworth Dixon, Esq."

"fi, St. James's-terrace, April 30, 1870.

" Sir,—On receip't of your note of yesterday, referring to
the account in my book, ' Free Russia,' of the defence of
the Convent of Solovetsk against the English squadron in
1854, I hasten to express my regret that any words of mine,
even when wrongly read, should have caused you pain. I
trust that when you turn to the passage again you will
see that no word is said on my part that could suggest a
doubt. The version is, as you say, the Russian version.
As such I give it, not as a true statement of all the facts,
but as a report from ' the other side,' singular and impres-
sive, as an illustration of native modes of thought. You
will see that the attack and defence of the convent fell
into my plan, not as a series of events now passed, and
matters of history, but as part of a general picture of an
existing state of mind.

" The facts on the English side are not very well known,
if one may guess by conversations in clubs and at dinner-
tables, and a record from your pen, as chief in command,
would interest many persons., As you appeal to my
' generosity' to assist in setting you right, 1 beg to add
that it would give me much pleasure to do everything in
my power to that end. Such a statement would enable
us to see a little more clearly than at present the reason
for opening fire on the convent.—Ever faithfully yours,
" W. HEPWORTH DIXON.
" Rear-Admiral Ommaney."

" 6, Talbot-square, May 5, 1870.
" Sir,—Permit me to thank you for your courteous reply
to my letter of the 29th ult., and to furnish you with a
general statement of my operations at Solovetsk in 1854.
Proceeding with her Majesty's ships, Brisk and Miranda,
under orders, on an exploration of the White Sea, we
visited Solovetsk. On approaching the anchorage I placed
the Miranda in advance of the Brisk to lead the way in,
for the reason that she drew less water, caution being ne-
cessary in navigating waters not without danger without
any pilot on board. The Miranda was commanded by
Captain Lyons, a gallant officer, who afterwards lost his
life in the Crimean war. I was on board the Brisk, ad-
miring the imposing aspect of the monastery and its mas-
sive fortifications as we drew into the bay, when my
attention was suddenly called to an exchange of shots be-
tween the Miranda and some field artillery drawn by horses
which emerged from the woods adjacent to the monastery.
With every desire to avoid hostilities with a locality bearing
such a sacred character, I signalled the Miranda to
anchor out of gunshot, and both ships did so about 4 p.m.
on the 18th of July, and on inquiry, Captain Lyons in-
formed me the Russians were the first to fire ; before re-
senting this hostile act, I was anxious to ascertain whether
it emanated from a military or an ecclesiastical authority.
The same evening the enemy was observed throwing up an
earth battery.to the westward of the fortress. On seeing
this I determined opening a communication by means of a
flag of truce, and demanding satisfaction, requiring the
surrender of garrison and the munitions of war—fail-
ing to comply, the place would be bombarded. At day-
light on the following morning, the 19th July, the flag of
truce was displayed from both ships ' • an officer, accom-
panied by an interpreter, proceeded to the monastery with
my written conditions. On reaching the shore they were
received by some monks and soldiers, both being armed
with muskets and swords. A monk who spoke French in-
formed our officer that he was confined there for a political
offence. We also learned that beside the garrison sta-
tioned there for the defence of the place arms were sup-
plied to the monks, who numbered about 300. A horse-
man was dispatched with my conditions to the monastery,
when our officer returned to the Brisk, having agreed that
we should send for the reply at the same time.
"At the hour appointed a boat was seen coming off. I
dispatched the same officer and interpreter, and they met
the bearer of the Archimandrite's reply half way. The
reply was evasive, declining to accede with my conditions,
and the Archimandrite acknowledged himself to be the sole
director of the military operations. At 8 a.m. the flag of
truec was hauled down, and the ships took up a position to
bombard the place. We opened fire at 8.30. The earth-
work battery, skilfully thrown up on the crest of the hill,
returned the fire • pieces of ordnance mounted in the
towers of the fortifications were fired at us besides. A
desultory fire of musketry from several parts of the
brushwood was directed at us, but their shorts fell short.
In tho course of an hour the battery was silenced, as the
guns were apparently dismantled, on which we suspended
our fire ; after a time, the Russians had the temerity to
rebuild the battery and remount the guns, when the fire
was resumed on both sides. Our shots fell harmless on the
massive breastwork which encloses the monastery ; the
domes and roof work were the only portions of the building
within range of our shot ;. these were considerebly da-
maged, and believe, occasionally, on fire. The battery.
was silenced a second time ; the guns and soldiers dis
appeared from our sight, and we concluded they were
withdrawn into the forces. We fired an occasional shot
at the monastery until the enemy ceased firing in the
afternoon, when the ships resumed their former anchor-
age in the bay. To make a reconnaissance of the defences
of the monastery I landed on the small island of Pesi.
My conclusions were that the place was unassailable by
the small force at my command, nor had I the means
of besieging it, so nothing more was to be done. We
remained quietly at anchor before the monastery until the
following morning. No further intercourse transpired,
and we, therefore, could not understand the amount of
damage the enemy bad sustained. Soon after daylight on
the 20th we left the anchorage, feeling satisfied the Archi-
mandrite was punished for assuming the character of a
combatant. On my part, I approached the anchorage
with every desire to respect the sacred character of the
spot ' • had he acted like a man of peace it would have
accorded better with his sacred calling. Of course the
Archimandrite had to make out a good case to the Empe-
ror, and he very adroitly turned it to his own advantage.
I was exalted by him to the rank of an admiral, the cor-
vettes were magnified into frigates ; as to swearing round
oaths, I never personally communicated with any one,
neither did we leave Solovetsk with shame.

" I gave the fullest credit to the gallantry and pluck
which the Russians manifested at the battery ; none but
a skilled artillerist could have selected the admirable and
advantageous position in which the guns were placed ; at
the same time I should mention that owing to the nature
of the coast navigation our nearest position to the monas-
tery was 1,600 yards, a longe range for damaging stone
walls,

" What would the Emperor have said had he known that
the Archimandrite assumed the offensive by being the first
to open fire ?
" But it is clear that he made good capital out of us for
the benefit of his monastery ; legends and miracles are
easily imposed upon a race who are slaves to superstition.
From the benefits he has derived from my visit I think
canonisation is my due.

" I had the advantage of a very good interpreter with
me, a gentleman who had been brought up in St. Peters-
burg, so that I had the means of obtaining pretty good
information. We heard that Solovetsk was a state prison,
and from your book this is a confirmed fact, and accounts
for the place being garrisoned ;. one consul who took his
passage home at the cOnclusion of the season assured me
that 80 soldiers` and eight guns were sent from w
Ahapgel
before we entered the White Sea.
" HaVing -thus -descriloea circiimstAntially my proceed-
ings at SOloyetsk,
,_l6 years ago, I have always been de-
Sirous of having full Particulars of the place, and I dare
saT you call testify to the strength of its position in a
rrillitary point of view. However faithfully you have
narrated the Russian version of the affair, I think you
might have refrained from drawing analogies and conclu-
sions which can scarcely avoid prejudicing the mind of
the general reader to my disadvantage. ,
" The term convent in the mind of the British public
conveys the idea of an establishment 0 harmless puns
or monks ; to fire upon such a plce Nrl.o therefore be
a sacrilegious act. :You do, not descrthe the true cha-
racter of the place spot* purposes of monastery,
fort, anci pA. SOU; The Archunandrite was some time
ch'aplain in- the army, and naval chaplain at Archangel.
" I should also remind you that we were at war with
Russia, and I did nothing but what was in accordance with
the usages of war. I commanded a small fove4 ip a re-
mote sea, surrounded by the enemy's e9o.s; we were cut'
off from all resources except thoo we carried` with us ; we
had to navigate a 4axgeroliii sea to which we were
strangers we had 'to blockade and harass the enemy's
ports and trade: Altogether I believe it was the roost
arduous duty which- fell to a vaval officer's, lot in, the
Russian war.

" In conclusion, I express a bow that, should you bring
out another edition of your work, you will do, me the jus-
tice to add a note to the end of your miracle chapter, or in
the preface, to. exonerate your countrymen from the ridi-
culous position iri will& you have placed them, as I think
that I have shown you that the Russians brought upon
themselves the attack upon Solovetsk. The attack
was not made hastily, or without due consideration of the

unpleasant duty which circumstances imposed uPced it
nor did we retire with shame, as you have expirsefijo.
Excuse my lengthy communication.—l remain, so,
fully yours,
W. Hepworth Dixon, Esq."
May 9, 1870. "H. ERAsmus 03010E1

1870.
" Sir,—Your note of Thursday,
" St. James's-terrace, May Ste
curious story, which I will gladly lay before the Pum,s.sis
your own words. In the next edition of ' Free -trio
I will also give your letter of explanation a consPle the
May 5, coratife
place. Permit me to add two words, one teat
part of my monastic hosts, the other on my own- is 3
on the important point of which side opened fire tuetiGe
general agreement between the two stories as to fact%eted
attacked, failed, withdrew. The Archimandrite conucl the
the defence. The fortress walls were not injure
domes of church and chapel were struck and burntL4g.
retired, you say, because the place was too s'4:the
They say the same thing ; only they believe Oa: bit
strength was not in the rusty guns and ancient Pik'
in the miraculous portrait of the Mother of God., doptd
" Excuse me for repeating that I have nowhere 3 910,0
the monkish facts, nor have I anywhere drawn 311
Od
and conclusions' from those facts.' I have told theustrx
from their point of view, as they tell it, and as an $
tion of their state of mind. A sense of art would" 00
man from forcing any personal views into another, keep
story, just as his respect for a noble profession w°ll'fihfia
him from censuring operations of which he was n°,,,,,00.
judge.—Very faithfully yours, "W. HEPWORTH v"
" Rear-Admiral Ommaney."