The Short Life of Rifleman Valentine Bambrick

On 12 April 1853, a day short of his 16th birthday, Valentine enlisted in the 60th Rifles. His profession is listed as a clerk. He joined the 1st Battalion, then stationed in India; in 1855, they were in Meerut, facing not mutineers but cholera, a scourge which killed 48 men, women and children of the regiment in one fell swoop. Two years later, on 10 May 1857, they were still in Meerut, and now they had a rebellion to contend with. Valentine would have been one of the men held back on that day by over-cautious officers from engaging the mutineers as they raged through the town, killing everyone in sight. When the Rifles were finally let loose, the mutineers were gone, and the British troops took out their frustration on anyone they presumed was a rebel. With the order “shoot them like dogs” ringing in their ears, they did precisely that, as Brian Izzard writes, “the first shots fired by the British troops in the Indian mutiny.” The Rifles and the Dragoons would be called again to perform a similar duty when dealing with the panicked Sappers and Miners who mutinied on 16 May in Meerut, shooting 50 of them in cold blood as they tried to escape.
Although the 60th would march for Delhi and gain their share of glory, Valentine, it appears, was not one of them, as he had been held back in Meerut for garrison duties; however, with the formation of the Roorkee Field Force, Valentine would have his share of the fighting. On May 6, while Jones was taking the far end of Bareilly, the 60th Rifles were pushed forward through the town. Led by Captain MacQueen in one of the most “delightful” charges Brigadier John Coke had ever seen, the 60th rushed the rebel guns and advanced up the street with “spirit and dash. ” However, the Ghazis might have seen this somewhat differently. Concealed in a serai was a group of these very spirited men; when the 60th entered the place, they suddenly found themselves at very close quarters with fighters who were intent on death. In the ensuing tumult, Bambrick would take no less than three of them on his own, killing one, before falling, twice wounded. While the feat itself might be seen as a soldier doing his duty, something about Bambrick must have stood out that day, for he was awarded a Victoria Cross.
The Roorkee Field Force was broken up shortly after the Battle of Bareilly, but the 60th would see sporadic fighting until January 1859, when their role in the mutiny came to an end. For Private Bambrick, who had not only been a good rifleman but an exceptionally feisty one, things suddenly changed. In May 1859, he was jailed for the first time, likely for insubordination. He would be jailed two more times in the same year, in July and in November. In 1860, the Rifles returned to England, but Bambrick, either by choice or because he was still serving his sentence, remained in India. He transferred to the 87th Regiment, and perhaps if he had stayed in India, we may never have heard of Valentine Bambrick again. However, the regiment sailed for home and in 1862, was now stationed in Curragh, Ireland. Once again, in July 1862, Bambrick was in jail. If his problem was discipline or alcohol is not clear, but in March 1863, a sentence of 160 days for being absent without leave was added to his growing list of offences. However, on 26 September 1863, the Aldershot Military Gazette noted the following:

“On Thursday, a most determined attempt of suicide was made by a soldier named Valentine Bambrick, of the 87th Royal Irish Fusiliers, who, for some acts of gallantry, was decorated with a Victoria Cross. It appears that in the course of the previous night (Wednesday), Bambrick was observed with a female in his room; was immediately apprehended and conveyed to the guard-room. At about twelve o’clock, the prisoner was being removed for the purpose of being brought before the commanding officer, when seeing a razor lying conveniently picked it up and, without the slightest hesitation, drew it across his throat, inflicting a fearful gash. He then as rapidly drew the instrument down both sides of his chest, inflicting dangerous wounds. At this time, the razor was wrested from him, and medical aid was at once summoned. Bambrick is now, we understand, doing as well as could be expected and is likely to recover. The female, who was perhaps the cause of his committing the rash act, came with him from Ireland, and appears (as does the unfortunate fellow himself) very anxious for an interview. However, there is a strict guard kept over him, and as it is necessary that he should be kept extremely quiet, it is not probable she will have her liberty granted her, at present, at all events.”

In November 1863, he received his discharge from the army, as unfit for further service, without a pension. Within hours of leaving Aldershot, he would find himself embroiled in a fight in a local brothel (lodging house) and would be accused of not only assault but theft.

The Trial

When we look at the trial of Valentine Bambrick, we cannot look at it as a simple miscarriage of justice and above all, we cannot view it from our modern sense of morality. It was not the trial itself that was the problem; one man lied, and another lost his temper. To understand what happened, we need to view it from both sides and try, if we can, to remain objective. The three main actors in this unfortunate incident are Valentine Bambrick, Lance-Corporal Henry Russell of the Commissariat, and a “spinster of no known occupation,” named Charlotte Johnson. The Lance-Corporal, who happened to be a married man, would tell the following story when they appeared before Mr Justice Baron Pigott at the Winter Assizes in Winchester in December 1863:

On November 15, at a lodging house on Pickford Street, Bambrick asked Russell to stand him a drink – they went to Russell’s room and just as Russell was handing over the money for the beer to Miss Johnson, Bambrick suddenly leapt up, seized him by the throat, threw him on the bed and while in the act of strangling him, tore off Russell’s four medals. Somehow, (remember, he is being strangled), Russell managed to scream out, “Murder!” in a voice loud enough to be heard in the street. Some soldiers who happened to be passing by rushed up and dragged Bambrick off of Russell. Two of the medals were subsequently found in the hallway, but the other two were gone. Bambrick was taken off to the guardhouse, and Miss Johnson was likewise arrested.

There are problems with Russell’s story, and as we shall see, Bambrick’s version is wildly different.

According to him, he was at the Pickford Street lodging house with Charlotte Johnson, who happened to have a room there. Just as they were going up to Charlotte’s room, a girl named Hayley rushed out of Russell’s room and begged Bambrick for protection. She had been beaten and said Russell had tried to strangle her. Bambrick went into the room and laid into Russell – in the ensuing beating that Russell received, in which Charlotte Johnson also took part, Russell’s medals were torn off his chest and fell on the floor. After Russell had been restrained, Bambrick picked up the medals and placed them on the mantlepiece. The police were notified, and both Bambrick and Johnson were still there when they showed up. Bambrick never saw the medals again after he put them on the mantlepiece, but somehow they disappeared. However, they reappeared in Charlotte Johnson’s room. The girl, Hayley, was placed by Bambrick in a hotel to present her as his alibi at his trial. However, the trial was so long in coming, and Hayley, being what was then termed an “unfortunate,” found it was impossible for her to remain in Winchester – she duly disappeared, and Bambrick was unable to find her.

According to the Hampshire Chronicle of 5 December, 1863, Bambrick…”urged that if his better feelings would not have prevented him from committing such a paltry robbery, his interest would, for he was in possession of a medal more prized by the British soldier than all those possessed by the prosecutor – the Victoria medal, which conferred £10 annually upon him, and also a pension, all of which he would lose if convicted. He urged that it would have been much easier for him to have dashed the beer he had in his hand in the prosecutor’s face whilst in the street if he wanted to rob him of his medals, and averred that the prosecutor had generally stated in his evidence that which was false.”

It is interesting to note that another version of the story has Bambrick and Johnson approaching the lodging when they heard Hayley screaming, “Murder!” Bambrick rushed up and found Hayley coming out of Russell’s room. However, it was Russell’s story that was taken as the truth. No one considered for a moment that the Lance-Corporal, a married man, would have had a hard time explaining, not only to his superiors but to his wife, why he was in a brothel, beating and strangling a prostitute, and his medals had vanished. The thrashing he received from Bambrick had undoubtedly wounded his pride and seemed to have taken his conscience. As the only witness for the prosecution, Russell managed to convince the court that he was the maligned party and with no Hayley coming forward, the judge and jury found both Bambrick and Johnson guilty of assault and theft. When the verdict of guilty was delivered, the judge, who had been struck by the soldier’s manly bearing and evident intelligence, deferred passing sentence until the following morning; but as they moved the prisoner from the dock, he cried out, ” It’s of no consequence what you do now. I don’t care about losing my pension, but I have lost my position. I don’t care what you do with me. You may hang me if you like.”

Unfortunately, Bambrick’s behaviour, like the outburst described, did not endear him to anyone. He spoke “most contemptuously” and did little to hide his outrage at the proceedings. He pointed out to the court that he did not need to steal Russell’s medals; he had his own – a Victoria Cross, “a medal more prized than all those possessed by his accuser,” which carried with it a pension of £10 a year. However, the jury did find both him and Miss Johnson guilty, and the next day, the judge passed his sentence.

“Valentine Bambrick, I don’t know that I ever had a more painful duty than in considering your case. I have felt great anxiety about it, and have considered everything you urged in your defence, but the evidence which satisfied the jury has satisfied me, and it does appear to me to be as clear a case as ever was tried. You say you had a witness, and that witness might have put some other construction on the matter. If you had made an application to have your trial postponed, I should have been the first to listen to your application, and I can’t help thinking, from the intelligence you displayed, you must have been aware that you could have made such an application. I am bound to say that I don’t think any witness could have altered the facts. You were found in a deadly struggle with another man. He was under you, and a witness said that when he found you, Russell was almost choked and suffocated by the pressure of your hand on his throat. It is perfectly clear he was robbed of his medals, and of them were found at the house where the woman lodged. How could they have come there? How did they come from the breast of Russell? I have no doubt you have exhibited great gallantry and great courage, and have well entitled yourself to the Victoria Cross. Had it not been for your character, I should have put in force the provisions of a recent statute and subjected you to personal castigation, but, as it is, I deal with your case with great regret. I should have been delighted if the jury could have seen their way to a doubt. I believe that you must have been under the influence of drink, for there was no adequate motive for your act, for the medals are only of trifling value.
Your punishment must be very severe. It must be penal servitude for three years.
With regard to you, Charlotte Johnson, you took a very subordinate part in the affair.
Bambrick, holding up the girl’s hand, said,
“Look at this small hand, my lord; it is absurd to suppose she could have done much against a strong man. She was merely in the room.”
The judge replied, “I say she only took a subordinate part. I shall not punish her so severely as the male prisoner. She must be imprisoned, with hard labour, for 12 months.” Bambrick then shouted, “There won’t be a bigger robber in England than I shall be when I come out.”