4 1 8 APPENDIX. ' from the redoubt were clean out of the way when the ' Fusilier Guards pushed forward.' Is there any truth — any semblance of truth — in this denial? We will see. General Beiitinck, who was personally present with the Fusilier Guards when they began their advance, wrote in his Eeport the day next after the battle : ' The entrencli-
- ment partially won by the Light Division was lost, and at
- the moment some confusion was occasioned hy t/ie regiment
' obliged to abandon it retiring through the iScots Fusilier ' Guards, and thereby putting their left tving out of line. ' The battalion retired for a short time, re-formed, and re-
- turned to its post. In this partial movement to the rear,
- a .severe loss was sustained by the Scots Fusilier Guards.'
— HoIograx>h Report by General Bentinck. Colonel (now General) Ridley commanded one of the wings of the Fusi- lier Guards, and he has orally confirmed to me the truth of the statement. Colonel Percy commanded the left-flank company of the Grenadiers, and was therefore so j)laced as to be able to see what happened to the Fusilier Guards. He writes : ' The ' rcpitdsed regiments came down violently tipon them and ' broke their line. If the Russians alone had come down ' upon them, they would have been received with the ' bayonets.' Captain the Honourable Hugh Annesley, an officer of the Fusilier Guards, two days after the battle, made this entry in his journal : ' Tiien the 23d came dotcn in one ' mass rigid on top of our line. Th(3ir disorder was ' caused by the Colonel and both Majors being killed, and ' no one knowing who to look to for orders. However it •was, they swept half my company clean away, and a great
- many of the next one to if.' — Extracted from the original
MS. Of the officers of the Fusilier Guards with whom I have
