51 This apparatus took the form of a specially-adapted mortar that could throw a line from the
shore to ships in distress close to shore. This line could then be used to haul harness equipment aboard the stricken vessel and to facilitate the landing of the shipwrecked crew.
52 Permission was granted via a letter to the Institution from Sir Robert Peel, 25 August 1824.
See Cox, Lifeboat Gallantry, p. 3. The portrait selected for use on the medal was based on a portrait bust by the sculptor Sir Francis Chantrey.
53 Cox, Lifeboat Gallantry, p. 4. 54 Cox, Lifeboat Gallantry, p. 3.
55 O. Warner, The Life-boat Service (London, 1974), p.10; Cox, Lifeboat Gallantry, p. 3. Henry
132
The reverse design, which was reminiscent of Delacroix‟s “The Barque of Dante”, showed a naked mariner being pulled from the sea by the crew of a small boat, whilst the accompanying inscription, “Let not the deep swallow me up”, quoted from Psalm 69, and alluded to the Christian values which had influenced the creation of the Institution. Significantly, the Institution‟s medals were struck at a smaller size than those issued by the RHS at the time and, perhaps once again drawing inspiration from the Waterloo Medal, were from the outset intended to be worn suspended from a length of blue ribbon. The first medals were often pierced to facilitate the fitting of a suspension ring and, as early as June 1825, the Committee had instructed that „a gold or silver loop be attached to
every medal‟.56 The presentation of a wearable medal bearing the Royal effigy
was not without significance. As Prochaska has observed, „in a hierarchical society, the humble subject looks on a royal medal with the same respect as a
magnate looks on a peerage‟.57 From the outset the medals were thus intimately
linked with patriotism and loyalty to the Crown. Moreover, they were accordingly highly valued and much sought after. Indeed their allure crossed class boundaries; no-one was keener to receive one than Sir William Hillary. Medals were intended to be granted to members of all social classes, the earliest
gallantry awards being voted on 10 July 1824.58 The Institution was likewise
keen to cement the loyalty of its core supporters and the presentation to them of medals bearing the Royal effigy was an effective means of attaining this end. Almost as soon as the engraver William Wyon had completed the dies for the medal a programme of liberal distribution began, with gold medals being presented to key establishment sponsors:
Table 2. RNIPLS: Early Honorary Gold Medals59
Date Recipient Role
14 May 1825 HM King George IV Patron 14 May 1825 Dr Manner Sutton,
Archbishop of Canterbury
Presided over inaugural meeting
18 April 1826 Thomas Wilson MP Chairman May 1826 HRH Duke of Sussex Vice Patron
56 Cox, Lifeboat Gallantry, p. 4. 57 Prochaska, Royal Bounty, p. 41. 58 Cox, Lifeboat Gallantry, p. 7. 59 Cox, Lifeboat Gallantry, p. 405.
133
Popular legend today celebrates Hillary as the founder of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, or RNLI, as the Royal National Institution for the Preservation of Life from Shipwreck (RNIPLS) was renamed in 1854. Hillary‟s role was undoubtedly crucial and his enthusiasm for the establishment of a national lifeboat network was doubtless in part driven by his intense personal experience as a rescuer, but it was also a manifestation of a deeply-rooted inclination to pursue grand causes. The recruitment of the King as Patron established the new organisation‟s social cache and helped to secure an initial inflow of funds from the well-heeled and to secure the short-term financial security of the Institution, but the ambition of its purpose and a rapid decline in annual income thereafter was soon to highlight the risks of such a narrow funding base.
The granting of Royal patronage to the Institution had initially helped to encourage wealthy donors to contribute generously to the Institution‟s coffers, but the early rush of enthusiasm did not last and its income rapidly fell into decline. In 1831 the Institution‟s annual income had slipped to just over £800 and even the national publicity surrounding Grace Darling‟s rescue of the crew and passengers of the Forfarshire in 1838 did little to boost public support. In the absence of any active fundraising activities, the Institution‟s annual income had sunk to £354 in 1850, a situation that may to some extent have been exacerbated by the establishment in 1839 of the Shipwrecked Fishermen and Mariners‟ Royal Benevolent Society (SFMRBS) – a body that actively engaged itself in the raising of money to fund many of the same activities undertaken by the Institution.60
Drawing on both private sponsors and the modest annual subscriptions of tens of thousands of mariners, the SFMRBS enjoyed a far broader funding-base than the Institution and was able to support a range of core functions, including the provision of financial support to the families of drowned sailors and material assistance to seamen wrecked on the British coast. This represented a major undertaking, it being reported at the Society‟s annual general meeting in 1863
60 W. Fevyer, „Shipwrecked Fishermen and Mariners‟ Royal Benevolent Society‟, Life Saving
134
that it had afforded relief to 7,250 shipwrecked persons and 3,687 widows and
orphans during the previous twelve months.61
Further practical assistance was provided to mariners from 1850 by the establishment of a number of SFMRBS-sponsored lifeboat stations. These continued to be managed by the SFMRBS for some years but, following the
passage of the Merchant Shipping Act in 1854,62 the decision was taken to pass
the responsibility for this function to the RNLI.63 Using its substantial funding
base - in 1863 it raised £17,734-13s-5d from the subscriptions and other
sources64 - the SFMRBS was also able to support elderly and sick seamen were
through the provision of a hospital at Belvedere in Kent.65
In addition to providing for the welfare of its membership the Society began, in 1851, to issue medals in gold and silver to recognise „heroic or praiseworthy exertions to save life from shipwreck, etc., on the High Seas or coasts of India or
the Colonies‟.66 The clear phrasing of the award‟s terms of reference sought to
ensure that there would be no conflict with the work of the Institution in rewarding lifesaving acts around the coasts of Britain and Ireland, anticipating the agreement on the provision of lifeboats and post-rescue care subsequently reached between the two organisations in response to the Merchant Shipping Act in 1854.67
61 Yorkshire Gazette, 10 May 1863, p. 7.
62 The Act recognised the need for the Board of Trade to provide assistance to voluntary
lifesaving organisations, but specified that such assistance should be channelled through a single organisation.
63 Warner, The Life-boat Service, p. 38.
64 Including 3 shillings each from 49,898 mariners. Yorkshire Gazette, 10 May 1863, p. 7. 65 Fevyer, „Shipwrecked Fishermen‟, p. 53-55.
66 A. Wilson & J.H.F. McEwan, Gallantry, (Oxford, 1939), p. 63. At the 1863 Annual General
Meeting it was reported that 125 lives had been saved and 17 medals awarded. Yorkshire Gazette, 10 May 1863, p. 7. Sea also Anon., Heroism at Sea: A History of Awards for Skill and Gallantry
at Sea Presented by the Society since 1851 (e-book, Chichester, 2009).
135