After the restoration, when
the English judges who had officiated in Scotland during the usurpation,
were expelled, and the court of session re-established, Sir James Dundas
was, in 1662, appointed one of the judges, and took his seat on the bench
under the title of lord Arniston. His high character and great natural
abilities, were thought sufficient to counterbalance the disadvantage
arising from the want of a professional education. But he held this
appointment only for a short time. For Charles II. having been induced by
the unsettled state of Scotland, to require that all persons holding
office, should subscribe a declaration, importing that they held it
unlawful to enter into leagues or covenants, and abjuring the "national
and solemn league and covenant," the judges of the court of session were
required to subscribe this test under pain of deprivation of
office. The majority of them complied; but Sir James Dundas refused,
unless he should be allowed to add, "in so far as such leagues might lead
to deeds of actual rebellion." Government, however, would consent to no
such qualification; and lord Arniston was consequently deprived of his
gown. The king himself had proposed as an expedient for obviating the
scruples of the recusant judges, that they should subscribe the test
publicly, but should be permitted to make a private declaration of
the sense in which they understood it. Most of them availed themselves of
this device, but lord Arniston rejected it, making the following manly
answer to those of his friends who urged him to comply—"I have repeatedly
told you, that in this affair I have acted from conscience: I will never
subscribe that declaration unless I am allowed to qualify it; and if my
subscription is to be public, I cannot be satisfied that the salvo
should be latent." His seat on the bench was kept vacant for
three years, in the hope, apparently, that he might be prevailed on to
yield to the solicitations which, during that interval, were unceasingly,
but in vain addressed to him, not only by his friends and brother judges,
but by the king’s ministers. He had retired to his family seat of Arniston,
where he spent the remainder of his life in the tranquil enjoyment of the
country, and in the cultivation of literature, and the society of his
friends. He died in the year 1679, and was succeeded in his estates by his
eldest son Robert, the subject of the immediately succeeding notice.
DUNDAS, ROBERT, of Arniston,
son of Sir James, by Marion, daughter of lord Boyd, was bred to the
profession of the law, and for many years represented the county of
Edinburgh in the Scottish parliament. In the year 1689, immediately after
the revolution, he was raised to the bench of the court of session by king
William, and took the title of lord Arniston. He continued to fill that
station with great honour and integrity during the long period of
thirty-seven years; and died in the year 1727, leaving his son Robert, by
Margaret, daughter of Robert Sinclair of Stevenston, to succeed him in his
estates, and to follow his footsteps in the legal profession.
DUNDAS, ROBERT, of
Arniston, F. R. S. Edinburgh, third lord of session of the family, and
first lord president, was born on the 9th December, 1685. Although at no
time distinguished for laborious application to study, yet he had obtained
a general acquaintance with literature, while his remarkable acuteness,
and very extensive practice, rendered him a profound lawyer. He became a
member of the faculty of advocates in 1709, and in 1717, while the country
was recovering from the confusion occasioned by the rebellion of 1715, he
was selected, on account of his firmness and moderation, to fill the
responsible office of solicitor-general for Scotland, which he did with
much ability and forbearance. In 1720, he was presented to the situation
of lord advocate; and in 1722, was returned member to the British
parliament for the county of Edinburgh. In parliament he was distinguished
by a vigilant attention to Scottish affairs, and by that steady and
patriotic regard to the peculiar interests of his native country, which
has been all along one of the most remarkable characteristics of his
family. When Sir Robert Walpole and the Argyle party came into power in
the year 1725, Mr Dundas resigned his office, and resumed his place as an
ordinary barrister; soon after which, he was elected by his brethren dean
of the faculty of advocates; a dignity which confers the highest rank at
the bar, it being even at this day a question, whether, according to the
etiquette of the profession, the dean is not entitled to take precedence
of the lord advocate and the solicitor-general. In 1737, Mr Dundas was
raised to the bench; when, like his father, and grandfather, he took the
title of lord Arniston. He held the place of an ordinary, or puisne judge,
until the year 1748, when, on the death of lord president Forbes of
Culloden, he was raised to the president’s chair, and continued to hold
that high office until his death. He died in 1753, in the 68th year of his
age.
As a barrister Mr Dundas
was a powerful and ingenious reasoner. To great quickness of apprehension
he added uncommon solidity of judgment; while, as a public speaker, he was
ready, and occasionally impressive; without being declamatory. His most
celebrated display was made in 1728, at the trial of Carnegie of Finhaven,
indicted for the murder of the earl of Strathmore. Mr Dundas, who was
opposed on that occasion to Duncan Forbes of Culloden, then lord advocate,
conducted the defence with great ability, and had the merit, not only of
saving the life of his client, but of establishing, or rather
restoring, the right of a jury in Scotland to return a general verdict
on the guilt or innocence of the accused. An abuse, originating in bad
times, had crept in, whereby the province of the jury was limited to a
verdict of finding the facts charged proven, or not proven,
leaving it to the court to determine by a preliminary judgment on the
relevancy, whether those facts, if proved, constituted the crime laid in
the indictment. In this particular case, the fact was, that the earl of
Strathmore had been accidentally run through the body, and killed, in a
drunken squabble; the blow having been aimed at another of the party, who
had given great provocation. The court, in their preliminary judgment on
the relevancy, found that the facts, as set forth in the indictment, if
proved, were sufficient to infer the "pains of law,"—or, in other
words, that they amounted to murder;—and therefore they allowed the
public prosecutor to prove his case before the jury, and, the accused to
adduce a proof in exculpation. Had the jury confined themselves to the
mere question whether or not the facts stated in the indictment were
proved, the life of Mr Carnegie would have been forfeited. But
Mr Dundas, with great acuteness and intrepidity, exposed and denounced
this encroachment on the privileges of the jury, which he traced to the
despotic reigns of Charles II., and his brother James II.; and succeeded
in obtaining a verdict of not guilty. Since that trial, no similar attempt
has been made to interfere with juries. The trial, which is in other
respects interesting, will be found reported in Arnot’s Collection of
celebrated Criminal Trials; and in preparing that report, it appears, that
Mr Arnot was favoured, by the second lord president Dundas, with his
recollections, from memory, of what his father had said, together with the
short notes from which Mr Dundas himself spoke. These notes prove, that,
in preparing himself, he merely jotted down, in a few sentences, the heads
of his argument, trusting to his extemporaneous eloquence for the
illustrations.
In his judicial capacity,
lord Arniston was distinguished no less by the vigour of his mind and his
knowledge of the law, than by his strict honour and inflexible integrity.
It has been said of him, that his deportment on the bench was forbidding
and disagreeable; but although far from being affable or prepossessing in
his manners, he was much liked by those who enjoyed his friendship; and
was remarkable throughout his life, for a convivial turn approaching
occasionally to dissipation. Some allowance, however, must be
made for the manners of the time, and. for the great latitude in their
social enjoyments, which it was the fashion of the Edinburgh
lawyers of the last century, to allow themselves. It is to be regretted
that lord Arniston was not raised to the president’s chair earlier in
life. He succeeded lord president Forbes, one of the most illustrious and
eminent men who ever held that place; and it is not therefore very
wonderful, that, far advanced in life as president Dundas was, he should
not have been able to discharge the duties of his important office, with
all the dignity and energy of his highly-gifted predecessor.
Lord Arniston was twice
married; first, to Elizabeth, daughter of Robert Watson of Muirhouse, by
whom he left Robert, afterwards lord president of the court of session,
and two daughters; and secondly, to Anne, daughter of Sir Robert Gordon,
of Invergordon, bart., by whom he left four sons, and one daughter. One of
the sons of this second marriage was Henry, afterwards raised to the
peerage under the title of lord viscount Melville.
DUNDAS, ROBERT, of Arniston,
lord president of the court of session, the eldest son of the first lord
president Dundas, by Elizabeth, daughter of Robert Watson of Muirhouse,
was born on the 18th of July, 1713. When at school and at college he was a
good scholar; but afterwards was never known to read through a book, and
seldom even to look into one, unless from curiosity, when he happened to
be acquainted with the author. It was the custom at the period when the
subject of this memoir received his education, for Scottish gentlemen,
intended for the higher walks of the legal profession, to study the Roman
law at the schools on the continent, where that law was then taught with
much celebrity. Young Dundas, therefore, after acquiring the elementary
branches of his education, under the care of a domestic tutor, and at the
schools and university of Edinburgh, proceeded to Utrecht, towards the
close of the year 1733, in order to prosecute his legal studies at that
famous university. He remained abroad during four years; spending his
academical vacations in visiting Paris, and several of the principal towns
and cities in France, and the Low Countries.
He returned to Scotland in
the year 1737, and in the year following, became a member of the faculty
of advocates. His first public appearances sufficiently proved that he had
inherited the genius and abilities of his family; his eloquence was
copious and animated; his arguments convincing and ingenious; while even
his most unpremeditated pleadings were distinguished by their methodical
arrangement. In consultation his opinions were marked by sound judgment
and great acuteness; while his tenacious memory enabled him with facility
and readiness to cite precedents and authorities. Although endowed by
nature with very considerable talents for public speaking, yet he not only
neglected the study of composition, but contemned the art of elocution. In
his pleadings, however, as well as in his conversation, he displayed a
great deal of fancy and invention, which the strength and soundness of his
judgment enabled him to restrain within due bounds. In spite of his want
of application, and a strong propensity to pleasure and dissipation, he
rose rapidly into practice at the bar. But from the course which he
adopted, it seems to have been his intention, without rendering himself a
slave to business, to attain such a high place in his profession, as
should entitle him to early promotion. Acting on this principle, he
usually declined, except in very important cases, to prepare those written
pleadings and arguments which at that time, and until lately, were so well
known in the court of session. The labour attending this part of his
professional duty he felt to be irksome. For the same reason he was
accustomed to return many of the briefs which were sent to him; confining
his practice to noted cases, or such as excited general interest. In this
manner, without undergoing the usual drudgery of the bar, he acquired a
degree of celebrity and distinction, which opened to him, at a period
remarkably early in his career, the highest honours of his profession. In
September 1742, when he had just entered his twenty-ninth year, he was
appointed solicitor-general for Scotland. He had obtained this appointment
under the Carteret administration, and therefore, in 1746, when the Pelham
party gained the ascendancy, he resigned this office along with the
ministry; but in the same year, (as had happened to his father under
similar circumstances,) he was honoured by one of the strongest marks of
admiration which his brethren at the bar could confer; having been, at the
early age of thirty-three, elected dean of the faculty of advocates; which
office he continued to hold until the year 1760, when he was elevated to
the bench.
In the beginning of the
year 1754, Mr Dundas was returned to parliament as member for the county
of Edinburgh, and in the following summer he was appointed lord advocate
for Scotland. During the rancorous contention of parties which at that
time divided the country, it was scarcely possible to escape obloquy, and
Mr Dundas shared in the odium cast upon the rest of his party by the
opposition; but it may be truly affirmed of him, that in no instance did
he swerve from his principles, or countenance a measure which he did not
believe to be conducive to the general welfare of the country. He suffered
much in the opinion of a numerous party in Scotland on account of his
strenuous opposition to the embodying of the militia in that part of the
kingdom. The alarm of invasion from France, occasioned by the small
expeditions which sometimes threatened our coasts, had led to numerous
meetings throughout the country to petition parliament in favour of the
establishment of a militia force for the defence of Scotland. There were
cogent reasons, however, why these petitions should not be acceded to. The
country was still in a very unimproved condition; agriculture neglected,
and manufactures in their infancy; while the inhabitants were as yet but
little accustomed to the trammels of patient industry. In such
circumstances, to put arms into their hands had a tendency to revive that
martial spirit which it was the great object of government to repress. The
embodying of the militia was farther objectionable, inasmuch as the
disaffected partisans of the Stuart family, although subdued were by no
means reconciled to the family of Hanover; and, therefore, to arm the
militia, would have been in effect so far to counteract the wise measure
of disarming the Highlanders, which had proved so efficacious in
tranquilizing the northern districts of the kingdom. Mr Dundas’s
opposition to the proposal for embodying a militia in Scotland was thus
founded on grounds of obvious expediency; any risk of foreign invasion
being more than counterbalanced by the still greater evil of a domestic
force on which government could not implicitly rely, and which might by
possibility have joined rather than opposed the invaders. The lesson
taught by the rebellion in Ireland, in 1797, has since illustrated the
danger of trusting arms in the hands of the turbulent and disaffected, and
has fully established the wisdom of Mr Dundas’s opposition to a similar
measure in Scotland.
On the 14th of June, 1760,
Mr Dundas was appointed lord president of the court of session, the
highest judicial office in Scotland. When he received this appointment,
some doubts were entertained how far, notwithstanding his acknowledged and
great abilities, he possessed that power of application, and that measure
of assiduity which are the first requisites for the due discharge of the
duties of the high office he filled. Fond of social intercourse, and
having risen to eminence as a lawyer by the almost unassisted strength of
his natural talents, he had hitherto submitted with reluctance to the
labour of his profession. But it speedily became evident, that one
striking feature in his character had remained undeveloped; for he
had no sooner taken his seat as president, than he devoted himself to the
duties of his office with an ardour which had been rarely exhibited by the
ablest and most diligent of his predecessors; and with a perseverance
which continued unabated until his death. So unwearied and anxious was his
application to the business of the court, that he succeeded in disposing
of an arrear of causes which had accumulated during a period of five
sessions. This task he accomplished in the course of the summer session of
1760, and that without interrupting or impeding the current business of
the court; and while he presided, no similar arrear ever occurred.
President Dundas was
distinguished by great dignity and urbanity. In delivering his opinions on
the bench, he was calm and senatorial; avoiding the error into which the
judges in Scotland are too apt to fall, namely, that of expressing
themselves with the impatience and vehemence of debaters eager to support
a particular side, or to convince or refute their opponents in an
argument. Impressed with a conviction that such a style is ill suited for
the bench, president Dundas confined himself to a calm and dispassionate
summary of the leading facts of the case, followed by an announcement, in
forcible, but unadorned language, of the legal principle which ought, in
his apprehension, to rule the decision. To the bar, he conducted himself
with uniform attention and respect; a demeanour, on the part of the bench,
to which, in former times, the Scottish bar was but little accustomed; and
even at this day, the deportment of the Scottish judges to the counsel
practising before them, is apt to surprise those who have had
opportunities of observing the courtesy uniformly displayed by the English
judges in their intercourse with the bar. President Dundas listened with
patience to the reasonings of counsel; he neither anticipated the
arguments of the pleader, nor interrupted him with questions; but left him
to state his case without interference, unless when matter evidently
irrelevant was introduced, or any offence committed against the dignity of
the court. In this last particular, he was sufficiently punctilious,
visiting the slightest symptom of disrespect to the bench, with the
severest animadversion. While he was thus constant in his anxiety to
improve the administration of justice, and to insure due respect for his
own court, he was scrupulously attentive in reviewing the decisions, and
watchful in the superintendance of the conduct of the inferior judges. He
also treated with the greatest rigour every instance of malversation or
chicanery in the officers or inferior practitioners in the courts. No
calumnious or iniquitous prosecution, and no attempt to pervert the forms
of law, to the purposes of oppression, eluded his penetration, or escaped
his marked reprehension.
A disregard or contempt for
literary attainments has been brought as a charge against president Dundas;
and a similar charge was, with less justice, afterwards made against his
celebrated brother, lord Melville. This peculiarity was the more
remarkable in the president, because in early life he had prosecuted those
studies which are usually termed literary, with advantage and success. In
his youth he had made great proficiency in classical learning; and as his
memory retained faithfully whatever he had once acquired, it was not
unusual with him, even towards the close of his life, in his speeches from
the bench to cite and apply, with much propriety, the most striking
passages of the ancient authors.
Having attained the
advanced age of 75 years, president Dundas was seized with a severe and
mortal illness, which, although of short continuance, was violent in its
nature; and he died at his house in Adam Square, Edinburgh, on the 13th of
December, 1787; having borne his sufferings with great magnanimity. He
retained the perfect enjoyment of his faculties until his death, and was
in the active discharge of his official duties down till the date of his
last illness. He was interred in the family burial-place at Borthwick. The
body was attended to the outskirts of the city by a procession consisting
of all the public bodies in their robes and insignia.
We cannot more
appropriately close this imperfect sketch, than by subjoining the
testimony borne to the high talents and many virtues of president Dundas,
in the funeral sermon preached on the Sunday following his interment. "But
by us, my brethren," the preacher observed, "he was known for other
virtues. The public have lost a father and friend. We saw him in the more
private walks of life, and experienced the warmth of his attachment, or
the blessings of his protection. The same ardour of mind that marked his
public character, descended with him to his retirement, to enliven his
devotion, and prompt his benevolence. Attached to the ordinances of
religion, and active in his duties as a member of the church, he was
studious to give you, in this holy place, an example of that public
reverence which is due from all to the Father of their spirits. Hospitable
in his disposition, attentive in his manner, lively in his conversation,
and steady in his friendships, he was peculiarly formed to secure the
esteem of his acquaintance, and to promote the intercourse of social life.
The poor, who mourn for his loss, and his domestics, who have grown old in
his service, testify the general humanity of his mind. But his family
alone, and those who have seen him mingling with them in the tenderness of
domestic endearment, knew the warmth of his paternal affections."—"Such
were the qualities that adorned the illustrious judge whose death we now
deplore. If he had his failings, (and the lot of humanity, alas! was also
his,) they were the failings of a great mind, and sprang from the same
impetuosity of temper which was the source of his noblest virtues. But
they are now gone to the drear abode of forgetfulness; while his better
qualities live in the hearts of the good, and will descend in the records
of fame, to rouse the emulation of distant ages."
President Dundas was twice
married, first to Henrietta, daughter of Sir James Carmichael Bailie, of
Lamington, Bart., by whom he left four daughters; and secondly, 7th
September, 1756, at Prestongrange, to Jane, daughter of William Grant of
Prestongrange, an excellent man, and good lawyer, who rose to the bench
under the title of lord Prestongrange. By his second lady he left four
sons and two daughters, of whom Robert, the eldest son, was successively
lord advocate and lord chief baron of the court of exchequer in Scotland.
DUNDAS, ROBERT, of
Arniston, lord chief baron of the court of exchequer, eldest son of the
second lord president Dundas, by Miss Grant, youngest daughter of William
Grant, lord Prestongrange, was born on the 6th of June, 1758. Like his
distinguished predecessors, he was educated for the legal profession, and
became a member of the faculty of advocates in the year 1779. When Mr
(afterwards Sir Ilay) Campbell was promoted to the office of lord
advocate, Mr Dundas, at a very early age, succeeded him as solicitor
general; and afterwards in 1789, on Sir Ilay’s elevation to the
president’s chair, Mr Dundas, at the age of 31, was appointed lord
advocate. This office he held for twelve years, during which time he sat
in parliament as member for the county of Edinburgh: and on the
resignation of chief baron Montgomery in the year 1801, he was appointed
his successor. Mr Dundas sat as chief baron until within a short time of
his death, which happened at Arniston, on the 17th of June, 1819, in the
62nd year of his age. He had previously resigned his office, and it
happened that Sir Samuel Shepherd, who succeeded him, took his seat on the
bench on the day on which Mr Dundas died.
Without those striking and
more brilliant talents for which his father and grandfather were
distinguished, chief baron Dundas, in addition to excellent abilities,
possessed, in an eminent degree, the graces of mildness, moderation, and
affability; and descended to the grave, it is believed, more
universally loved and lamented, than any preceding member of his family.
This is the more remarkable, when it is borne in mind that he held the
responsible office of lord advocate during a period of unexampled
difficulty, and of great political excitement and asperity. His
popularity, however, was not attributable to any want of firmness and
resolution in the discharge of his public duties; but arose in a great
measure, from his liberal toleration for difference in political opinion,
at a time when that virtue was rare in Scotland; and from his mild and
gentlemanlike deportment, which was calculated no less to disarm his
political opponents, than to endear him to his friends. It would have been
impossible, perhaps, for any one of his professional contemporaries to
have been the immediate agent of government in the trials of Muir,
Skirving, and Palmer, without creating infinite public odium.
As chief baron, Mr Dundas
was no less estimable. The Scottish court of exchequer never opened a very
extensive field for the display of judicial talent; but wherever, in the
administration of the business of that court, it appeared that the
offender had erred from ignorance, or from misapprehension of the revenue
statutes, we found the chief baron disposed to mitigate the rigour of the
law, and to interpose his good offices on behalf of the sufferer. It was
in private life, however, and within the circle of his own family and
friends, that the virtues of this excellent man were chiefly conspicuous,
and that his loss was most severely felt. Of him it may be said, as was
emphatically said of one of his brethren on the bench—"he died, leaving no
good man his enemy, and attended with that sincere regret, which only
those can hope for, who have occupied the like important stations, and
acquitted themselves so well."
Chief baron Dundas married
his cousin-german, the honourable Miss Dundas, daughter of Henry, the
first lord viscount Melville, by whom he left three sons, and two
daughters; Robert, an advocate, and his successor in the estate of
Arniston; Henry, an officer in the navy; and William Pitt. His eldest
daughter is the wife of John Borthwick, esq. of Crookston.
DUNDAS, DAVID, general Sir,
was born near Edinburgh, about the year 1735. His father, who was a
respectable merchant in Edinburgh, was of the family of Dundas of Dundas,
the head of the name in Scotland; by the mother’s side he was related to
the first lord Melville. This distinguished member of a great family had
commenced the study of medicine, but changing his intentions, he entered
the army in the year 1752, under the auspices of his uncle, general David
Watson. This able officer had been appointed to make a survey of
the Highlands of Scotland, and he was engaged in planning and inspecting
the military roads through that part of the country. While engaged in this
arduous undertaking, he chose young Dundas, and the celebrated general
Roy, afterwards quarter-master-general in Great Britain, to be his
assistants. To this appointment was added that of a lieutenancy in the
engineers, of which his uncle was at that time senior captain, holding the
rank of lieutenant-colonel in the army.
In the year 1759, Dundas
obtained a troop in the regiment of light horse raised by colonel Elliot,
and with that gallant corps, he embarked for Germany, where be acted as
aid-de-camp to colonel Elliot. In that capacity he afterwards accompanied
general Elliot in the expedition sent out in the year 1762, under the
command of the earl of Albemarle, against the Spanish colonies in the West
Indies. On the 28th May, 1770, he was promoted to the majority of the 15th
dragoons, and from that corps he was removed to the 2nd regiment of horse
on the Irish establishment, of which he obtained the lieutenant-colonelcy.
It was to the ministerial
influence of general Watson that colonel Dundas owed his rapid promotion;
and he now obtained, through the same interest, a staff appointment as
quarter-master-general in Ireland. He was also allowed to sell his
commission in the dragoons, and at the same time to retain his rank in the
army. He afterwards exchanged his appointment for that of
adjutant-general, and in 1781 he was promoted to the rank of colonel.
Shortly after the peace of
1783, Frederick king of Prussia having ordered a grand review of the whole
forces of his kingdom, the attention of military men throughout Europe was
attracted to a scene so splendid. Amongst others, colonel Dundas, having
obtained leave of absence, repaired to the plains of Potsdam, and by
observation and reflection on what he there saw, he laid the foundation of
that perfect knowledge of military tactics, which he afterwards published
under the title of "Principles of Military Movements, chiefly applicable
to Infantry."
In the year 1790, colonel
Dundas was promoted to the rank of major-general, and in the following
year, he was appointed colonel of the 22nd regiment of infantry, on which
he resigned the adjutant-generalship of Ireland.
Previous to the publication
of general Dundas’ work on military tactics, the military manoeuvres of
the army were regulated by each succeeding commander-in-chief; while even
the manual exercise of the soldier varied with the fancy of the commanding
officer of the regiment. The disadvantages attending so irregular a system
is obvious; for when two regiments were brought into the same garrison or
camp, they could not act together until a temporary uniformity of exercise
had been established. To remedy these defects in our tactics, his majesty,
George III., to whom general Dundas’ work was dedicated, ordered
regulations to be drawn up from his book, for the use of the army; and
accordingly in June, 1792, a system was promulgated, under the title of
"Rules and Regulations for the formations, field-exercises, and movements
of his Majesty’s forces; with an injunction that the system should be
strictly followed and adhered to, without any deviation whatsoever: and
such orders as are formed to interfere with, or counteract their effects
or operation, are considered hereby cancelled and annulled." "The Rules
and Regulations for the Cavalry" were also planned by general Dundas. It
is therefore to him that we are indebted for the first and most important
steps which were taken to bring the British army to that high state of
discipline which now renders it the most efficient army in Europe.
At the commencement of the
late war, general Dundas was put on the staff; and in autumn 1793, he was
sent out to command a body of troops at Toulon. While on this service, he
was selected to lead a force ordered to dislodge the French from the
heights of Arenes, which commanded the town; and although he succeeded in
driving the enemy from their batteries, still the French were too strong
for the number of British employed in the service, and he was ultimately
driven back; and Toulon being consequently deemed untenable, lord Hood
judged it prudent to embark the troops and sail for Corsica. Soon after
the expedition had effected a landing in that island, some
misunderstanding having arisen between general Dundas and admiral Hood,
the former returned home.
General Dundas immediately
returned to the continent, and served under the duke of York in Holland;
and in the brilliant action of the 10th of May, 1794; at Tournay, he
greatly distinguished himself. During the unfortunate retreat of the
British army, which ended in the evacuation of the Dutch territory,
general Dundas acted with much skill and great gallantry, and on the
return of general Harcourt to England, the command of the British army
devolved upon him. Having wintered in the neighbourhood of Bremen, he
embarked the remnant of the British forces on board the fleet on the 14th
of April, 1795, and returned home.
In December, 1795, general
Dundas was removed from the command of the 22d foot, to that of the 7th
dragoons. He was also appointed governor of Languard-fort, and on the
resignation of general Morrison, he was nominated quarter-master-general
of the British army.
In the expedition to
Holland in the year 1799, general Dundas was one of the general officers
selected by the commander-in-chief; and he had his full share in the
actions of that unfortunate campaign. On the death of Sir Ralph
Abercrombie, general Dundas succeeded him in the command of the 2d North
British dragoons, and also in the government of Forts George and Augustus.
In the summer of 1801, he was second in command of the fine army of 25,000
men, which assembled in Bagshot heath; and made uncommon exertions to
bring it to the high state of discipline which it displayed on the day it
was reviewed before his majesty, George III., and the royal family.
On the 12th of March, 1803,
he resigned the quarter-master-generalship, and was put on the staff as
second in command under the duke of York, when his majesty invested him
with the riband of the order of the Bath. In the year 1804, he was
appointed governor of Chelsea Hospital, and on the 1st June of that year,
he, along with many others, was installed as a knight of the Bath in Henry
VII’s chapel. On the 18th of March, 1809, he succeeded the duke of York as
commander-in-chief of the forces, which high appointment he held for two
years. He was made a member of the privy council and colonel of the 95th
regiment. The last of the many marks of royal favour conferred on him, was
the colonelcy of the 1st dragoon guards.
General Dundas died on the
18th of February, 1820, and was succeeded in his estates by his nephew,
Sir Robert Dundas of Beechwood, Bart.