A court of inquiry was assembled at Chelsea to inquire into the transactions relating to the armistice and the definite convention. Sir Arthur Wellesley, sir Harry Burrard, sir Hew Dalrymple, and the principal generals engaged at Vimiero, were called before it. A minute investigation of all the circumstances took place, and a detailed report was made by the board; at the end of which, it was stated that no further judicial measures seemed to be called for. This report was not satisfactory to the government, and the members of the court were required to state individually whether they approved or disapproved of the armistice and convention. It then appeared that four approved, and three disapproved, of the convention. Among the latter the earl of Moira distinguished himself by a laboured criticism, which, however, left the pith of the question entirely untouched. The proceedings of the board were dispassionate and impartial but the report was not luminous; a circumstance to be regretted, because the rank and reputation of the members were sufficiently great to secure them from the revenge of party, and no set of men were ever more favourably placed for giving a severe and just rebuke to popular injustice. Thus ended the last act of the celebrated convention of Cintra, the very name of which will always be a signal record of the ignorant and ridiculous vehemence of the public feeling; for the armistice, the negotiations, the convention itself, and the execution of its provisions, were all commenced, conducted, and concluded, at the distance of thirty miles from Cintra, with which place they had not the slightest connexion, political, military, or local[14]! OBSERVATIONS. RORIÇA. 1º. General Thiebault says, that the scattered state of the French army, in the beginning of August, rendered its situation desperate; but that the slowness of sir Arthur Wellesley saved it. Others again have accused the latter of rashness and temerity. Neither of these censures appear to be well founded. It is true that Junot’s army was disseminated; but to beat an army in detail, a general must be perfectly acquainted with the country he is to act in, well informed of his adversary’s movements, and rapid in his own. Now rapidity in war depends as much upon the experience of the troops as upon the energy of the chief; and the English army was raw, the staff and commissariat mere novices, the artillery scantily and badly horsed, few baggage or draft animals were to be obtained in the country, and there were only a hundred and eighty cavalry mounted. Such impediments are not to be removed in a moment, and therein lies the difference betwixt theory and practice, between criticism and execution.