History of the war in the Peninsula and in the south of France from the year 1807 to the year 1814, vol. 6Napier, William Francis Patrick
History
History of the war in the Peninsula and in the south of France from the year 1807 to the year 1814, vol. 6
Napier, William Francis Patrick
Peninsular War, 1807-1814
This decision does not preclude the judgement of history, nor will
it sway that of posterity. The court-martial was assembled twenty
months after the event, when the war being happily terminated, men’s
minds were little disposed to treat past failures with severity.
There were two distinct prosecutors, having different views; the
proceedings were conducted at a distance from the scene of action,
defects of memory could not be remedied by references to localities,
and a door was opened for contradiction and doubt upon important
points. There was no indication that the members of the court were
unanimous in their verdict; they were confined to specific charges,
restricted by legal rules of evidence, and deprived of the testimony
of all the Spanish officers, who were certainly discontented with
Murray’s conduct, and whose absence caused the serious charge of
abandoning Copons’ army to be suppressed. Moreover the warmth of
temper displayed by the principal prosecutor, admiral Hallowel,
together with his signal on lord William Bentinck’s arrival, whereby,
to the detriment of discipline, he manifested his contempt for the
general with whom he was acting, gave Murray an advantage which he
improved skilfully, for he was a man sufficiently acute and prompt
when not at the head of an army. He charged the admiral with deceit,
factious dealings, and disregard of the service; described him as
a man of a passionate overweening, busy disposition, troubled with
excess of vanity, meddling with everything, and thinking himself
competent to manage both troops and ships.
Nevertheless sir John Murray had signally failed, both as an
independent general, and as a lieutenant acting under superior
orders. On his trial, blending these different capacities together,
with expert sophistry he pleaded his instructions in excuse for
his errors as a free commander, and his discretionary power in
mitigation of his disobedience as a lieutenant; but his operations
were indefensible in both capacities. Lord Wellington’s instructions,
precise, and founded upon the advantages offered by a command of the
sea, prescribed an attack upon Taragona, with a definite object,
namely, to deliver Valencia.
“_You tell me_,” said he, “_that the line of the Xucar, which covers
Valencia, is too strong to force; turn it then by the ocean, assail
the rear of the enemy, and he will weaken his strong line to protect
his communication; or, he will give you an opportunity to establish a
new base of operations behind him._”
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