A voice from Waterloo: A history of the battle fought on the 18th June, 1815Cotton, Edward
History
A voice from Waterloo: A history of the battle fought on the 18th June, 1815
Cotton, Edward
Waterloo, Battle of, Waterloo, Belgium, 1815
“The 13th article provides that _les troupes étrangères_, (the
foreign troops) shall not obstruct the carriage of provisions by land
or water to the capital.
“Thus it appears that every article in the convention relates
exclusively to the operations of the different armies, or to the
conduct of the allies and that of their generals, when they should
enter Paris; and, as the duke of Wellington states in his dispatch of
the 4th of July, with which he transmitted the convention to England,
it ‘decided all the military points then existing at Paris, and
touched nothing political[104].’
“But it appears clearly that, not only was this the Duke’s opinion of
the convention at the time it was signed, but likewise the opinion of
Carnot, of marshal Ney, and of every other person who had an interest
in considering the subject.
“Carnot says, in the _Exposé de la conduite politique de M. Carnot_,
(page 43,) _Il fut résolu d’envoyer aux généraux anglais et prussiens
une commission spéciale chargée de leur proposer une convention
purement militaire, pour la remise de la ville de Paris entre leurs
mains, en écartant toute question politique, puisqu’on ne pouvait
préjuger quelles seraient les intentions des alliés, lorsqu’ils
seraient réunis_. (It was decided to forward to the English and
Prussian generals a special commission, to the purport of proposing
to them a convention, purely military, for the surrender of the city
of Paris into their hands, setting aside all political questions,
since it was impossible to foresee what might be the ultimate
intentions of the allies, when they should be assembled.)
“It appears that marshal Ney fled from Paris in disguise, with a
passport given to him by the duc d’Otrante, under a feigned name,
on the 6th of July. He could not be supposed to be ignorant of the
tenor of the 12th article of the convention; and he must then have
known whether it was the intention of the parties who made it, that
it should protect him from the measures which the king, then at
St.-Denis, should think proper to adopt against him.
“But if marshal Ney could be supposed ignorant of the intention of
the 12th article, the duc d’Otrante, could not, as he was at the
head of the provisional government, under whose authority the prince
d’Eckmühl must have acted when he signed the convention[105].
“Would the duc d’Otrante have given a passport under a feigned name
to marshal Ney, if he had understood the 12th article as giving the
marshal any protection, excepting against measures of severity by the
two commanders in chief?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account