History of the war in the Peninsula and in the south of France from the year 1807 to the year 1814, vol. 6 — John Shaqi
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
“The Portuguese artillery under my command (twelve guns) attached to
general Hamilton’s division was posted on favourable ground about
750 or 800 yards from the bridge, and at least 700 yards S. W. of
the village of Albuera, their fire bore effectually upon the bridge
and the road from it to the bridge, and I received my orders to take
this position from lord Beresford when the enemy threatened their
main attack at the bridge. At a certain period of the day, I should
judge it to have been about the time the fourth division moved to
attack, _I received a verbal order in English from Don Jose Luiz de
Souza_ (now Conde de Villa Real, an aid-de-camp of lord Beresford)
_to retire by the Valverde road, or upon the Valverde road, I am not
sure which_; to this I strongly expressed words of doubt, and he then
rode off towards Albuera; as, however, I could see no reason for
falling back, and the infantry my guns belonged to being at hand, I
continued in action, and though I believe I limbered up once or twice
previous to the receipt of this message and moved a little to improve
my position, I never did so to retire. Soon after Don Jose left me,
seeing lord Beresford and some of his staff to my right, I rode
across to satisfy myself that I was acting correctly, but perceiving
that the French were giving way I did not mention the order I had
received, and as soon as lord Beresford saw me, he asked what state
my guns were in, and then ordered me to proceed as quickly as I could
with my nine-pounders to the right, which I did in time to bring them
into action against the retiring masses of the enemy. The foregoing
is the substance of an explanation given to lord Beresford which he
lately requested.”
Thus you have the whole of what sir Alexander Dickson (as he tells
me) wrote to you; and here therefore I might stop, my lord, to
enjoy your confusion. I might harp upon this fact, as being so
formidable a bar to your lordship’s argument, that rather than give
it publicity, you garbled your own correspondent’s letter. But my
object is not to gain a triumph over you, it is to establish the
truth, and I will not follow your example by suppressing what may
tend to serve your argument and weaken mine. It is of no consequence
to me whether you gave orders for a retreat or not. I said in my
History that you did not do so, thinking the weight of testimony to
be on that side, and it was only when your anonymous publications
called forth new evidence that I began to doubt the correctness of my
first statement.[5] But if the following observation in sir Alexander
Dickson’s letter can serve your argument, you are welcome to it,
although it is not contained in the substance of what he wrote to
you; and here also I beg of you to remember that this letter of sir
Alexander’s was written to me _after my Justification_ was printed.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account