must have been an exceptionally charming person to have left such an impression behind him. One always gets interested in the people whose papers one’s working on, but one doesn’t necessarily like them in the way we came to like Sir George.13
The goodwill he generated was not due to a charming manner alone; he, with his brother John, were noted for treating their tenants in a most considerate manner. They had to actively persuade these people to buy out their farms when the Land Acts provided for this; the tenants felt they were so well treated that they did not want to take over their own holdings. Earlier still, in 1881, the Belfast Morning Telegraph reported:
Major White, who lately so gallantly distinguished himself in Roberts’ famous march on Candahar, has made a generous abatement in rents to his tenants on his Cushleak estate here – giving 25, 20 and 15 per cent reduction respectively […] Last year his brother Mr John White, of London, gave his tenants here 33 per cent reduction. The White family have certainly shown themselves sympathetic and generous to their tenantry in these depressed times.14
This article was filed under a column called ‘Land Agitation’, and directly underneath it was a report of evictions in County Armagh, indicating that the Whites’ actions were far from conventional practice.
Sir George was not free of the social inhibition seemingly typical of the Whites. Rose recounts an incident where he excused himself ‘for leaving a party early on the grounds that he could not bear to keep his wife waiting up for him and quite making his hearers believe he was married though only eighteen’.15 For all his seeming urbanity, he had considerable problems with socialising, which became more and more a requirement as he rose through the military ranks. Rose again treats of the mannerisms of Sir George and his brother John:
The Whites have an unsociable side to them which is rather hard to explain as they are sympathetic and interested in their fellows. Everyone who met my father and uncle socially seemed to find a peculiar charm in them and they took pains too to make themselves agreeable, but my uncle would hardly ever spend a night under anyone else’s roof (including ours) and Father always had a dread of ‘other people’s homes’ especially in anticipation. When the ordeal was over he would often realise, quite as if it were a pleasant surprise that he had been markedly well received and ‘got on alright’ but, never, even at times when he was being very much lionized did it seem to dawn upon him that his presence would be missed if he sent his womenfolk alone to any social function.
Father liked to meet interesting or lively people (more especially in his own house), but it bored him to have to conform to other people’s habits of life or to go in for any social round and my uncle simply would not face it. Yet, when they were in society neither of them ever showed that he was bored. My uncle was especially impatient of what he called ‘a platitudinous dog’ but while talking to such a person would be almost extravagantly courteous.16
Again this analysis may throw light on some of Jack White’s behaviour. Referring, for example to D.H. Lawrence’s accounts of him, including, most famously, White punching the author in what appears to be a thuggish act, the fact that he was ill at ease and under stress might provide mitigating circumstances.17
Unlike his son, George White pursued a lifetime career in the army. He was appointed an ensign when aged eighteen in 1853 in the 27 Foot and, although quite ambitious, took five years to become a lieutenant, another five to reach captain, and was 38 before he became a major. Instead of being posted to ‘a real war in the Crimea’, he found himself in India which he detested, at first telling his sister that if he ‘had known what sort of a place it was I should have left the army and taken to breaking stones in Ireland’.18 Things changed, however, and he did see action in the Indian Mutiny of 1857–59 in which he won a medal, but it was not until the Afghan War (1879–80) that his much-desired career took off when he had attained the mature age of forty-four. The citation for the award of his Victoria Cross runs as follows:
George Stuart White, Major (now Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel), 92nd Regiment (Gordon Highlanders). Date of Act of Bravery: 6th October, 1879. For conspicuous bravery during the engagement at Charasia on the 6th October, 1879, when, finding that the artillery and rifle fire failed to dislodge the enemy from a fortified hill which it was necessary to capture, Major White led an attack on it in person. Advancing with two companies of his regiment, and climbing from one steep ledge to another, he came upon a body of the enemy strongly posted and outnumbering his force by about eight to one. His men being much exhausted and immediate action being necessary, Major White took a rifle and, going on by himself, shot the leader of the enemy. This act so intimidated the rest that they fled round the side of the hill and the position was won. Again on the 1st September, 1880, at the Battle of Kandahar, Major White, in leading the final charge under heavy fire from the enemy, who held a strong position supported by two guns, rode straight up to within a few yards of them, and seeing the guns, dashed forward and secured one of them, immediately after which the enemy retired.19
It is clear that White displayed a total disregard for the conventional instincts of self-preservation on 6 October 1879. Of course this is a primary requirement for such an award, but, as the citation makes clear, he acted in this fashion on more than one occasion. This lead some to mistakenly believe he had won a double VC; family documents maintain he was recommended on both occasions and ‘his VC bears the two dates’.20 At the age of 44, and with a newly-born son, White displayed a character that could appear enigmatic, at least to a modern sensibility. There are numerous other examples, but these occasions are the most dramatic indications of dedication to a cause that would have to be called selfless.
What The Times called ‘his readiness for any service’ manifested itself in accepting an offer of duty, ‘when at home in command of his own regiment in Edinburgh (a very pleasant duty)’, in Egypt where ‘the post assigned to him was less important than he deserved, and afforded little opportunity for military distinction’.21 A family record of his subsequent career provides details:
In October 1885 he was given a Brigade in Burma and six months later, in March 1886, he was given command of the field force in Burma with the local rank of Major General and remained in this command till 1888, when the subjugation of Upper Burma was complete […] From 1893 to 1898 he was the Commander in Chief in India after which he was appointed Quarter Master General in the War Office. At the outbreak of the South African War in 1899, he was appointed to command the Natal Field Force and defended Ladysmith in the famous siege. 22
For more than twenty years, despite his ambitions, his career had been undistinguished – a rank of major when his compatriot Frederick Roberts (Bobs), just three years older, was already a major general – but from the moment he charged up the hill of Takht-i-shah, his path to eminence took a similar trajectory.
Although earning the soubriquet ‘Hero of Ladysmith’ could be described as the apogee of his fame – he was probably the most famous man in the United Kingdom in 190023 – he continued to earn further plaudits and became a field marshal in 1903. When he died in London in 1912 his body was brought for burial to Fulke Whyte’s plot in Broughshane and his funeral was described as one of the biggest ever in the north of Ireland. Crowds met the ferry at Larne and accompanied it to the graveside; the town of Ballymena, en route, was completely shut down for a number of hours.24
Sir George, despite being known as the ‘Hero of Ladysmith’, had been the subject of questions about the wisdom of his actions in the Boer campaign. Even his obituary in The Times mentioned that ‘he had never commanded an army in the field against forces armed with modern weapons’ and acknowledged that ‘criticisms ha[d] been directed at him’ during the siege.25 However, his popularity overrode any such misgivings and on his return to England, Durand said, ‘it would serve no purpose to describe the various complimentary ceremonials’ that Sir George received except ‘a great dinner given in his honour by the Ulster Association in London’ where he was congratulated ‘upon the way in which he had acted upon
