The magistrates were obstinate, and the appeal was forwarded to England. On the 12th November intimation was sent to Major Dixon, in Walcheren, now in command of the Artillery, that the decision was unfavourable to the claims Dated Doctors’ Commons, 26 October, 1809. of the Corps. The following extract from the decision, addressed by Sir Charles Robinson to the Earl of Liverpool, explains the grounds on which it was based. “With respect to the bells of the church, the demands of the Artillery are, I conceive, altogether unsustainable. It is apparently not supported on the part of the Prize Commissioners, since they do not advert to this claim in their letter of the 4th of October. Anciently, there prevailed a law of pillage, which assigned to different corps and to different individuals a privileged claim to particular articles. Whether this was a privilege of the Artillery under the ancient custom of England, as described in the Petition, I am not informed; but in the modern usage of respecting property and public edifices, and more particularly those set apart for divine worship, such a demand cannot, I conceive, be sustained. What the custom may be,—whether deserving of any compensation in the division of what is properly prize, or from any other quarter,—may be a subject of consideration according to circumstances. But I am of opinion that the demand ought not to be enforced against the town.”
From subsequent correspondence which is extant, and which passed between General Macleod and Sir Anthony Farrington, it is evident that the former felt much regret that an old Regimental privilege should have disappeared during operations in which he had occupied so prominent a place; but the reader will admit that no one could have conducted the cause of the Corps in a more unselfish, chivalrous, and yet resolute manner.
N.B.—The comments of an officer of the sister corps, on the conduct of the Artillery at the siege of Flushing, were very favourable. Two extracts from Sir J. Jones’s work may be given.
“The guns of the batteries on the right of the attack were more particularly directed to enfilade and take en écharpe the rampart of the western sea-line, in order to silence the fire of its artillery on the fleet, now preparing to force the passage of the Scheldt. This they accomplished very effectually, by disabling or very severely wounding many of the traversing platforms and their carriages, and much injuring the guns themselves.”
Again:
“Discharges of carcasses and shells from the mortar batteries, with powerful flights of rockets intermixed, were kept up throughout the night on the devoted town, and frequently large portions of it burned with fury.”—Jones’s ‘Sieges,’ vol. ii. pp. 269-271.
CHAPTER XV.
Peninsular War resumed.—Passage of the Douro, and Talavera.
“The deliverance of the Peninsula was never due to the foresight and perseverance of the English ministers, but to the firmness and skill of the British Generals, and to the courage of troops whom no dangers could daunt and no hardships dishearten, while they remedied the eternal errors of the Cabinet.”—Napier.
In resuming the story of the Peninsular War, it will be seen that the narrative has to go back to an earlier date than that of the expedition described in the last chapter,—Sir Arthur Wellesley having returned from England to Lisbon, to take command of the army, so early as the 22nd April, 1809. But it has been thought better to clear the ground, so to speak, of the Walcheren Expedition, and thus to enable the reader to follow uninterruptedly the story of the operations, which terminated in the glorious victory of Talavera, and the subsequent withdrawal of the English troops from Spain to Portugal.
The British Government still resolved that the English army in Spain should be merely an auxiliary one, and remained still undeceived as to the real state of the Spanish forces. Perhaps it was as well, therefore, that the army entrusted to Sir Arthur Wellesley was not a larger one; for the difficulty he encountered in obtaining provisions and transport from the Spaniards would have been insurmountable, had the forces under his command been more numerous. Merida, 25 Aug. 1809. “I do not think,” wrote Sir Arthur to Lord Castlereagh, Cthat matters would have been much better if you had sent your large expedition to Spain instead of to the Scheldt. You could not have equipped it in Galicia, or anywhere in the north of Spain. If we had had 60,000 men instead of 20,000, in all probability we should not have got to Talavera to fight the battle, for want of means and provisions. But if we had got to Talavera, we could not have gone farther, and the armies would probably have separated for want of means of subsistence, probably without a battle, but certainly afterwards.” The campaign of 1809, from beginning to end, was marked by obstinacy on the part of Spanish Generals, and faithlessness on the part of the Spanish Government; by inadequate supplies of money from England, and by difficulties with the Portuguese troops, not the less annoying because they were often petty; as well as by hardships which tried the discipline of the English troops quite as much as the retreat to Corunna, and which drew from To Lord Castlereagh, dated Abrantes, 17 June, 1809. Sir Arthur Wellesley the bitter words: “We are an excellent army on parade, an excellent one to fight; but we are worse than an enemy in a country; and, take my word for it, that either defeat or success would dissolve us.” The success which he almost dreaded came: the 27th and 28th July witnessed as gallant an exhibition of English courage as has ever been seen; but in a few days Sir Arthur wrote: “A starving army is actually worse than none. The soldiers To Marquis Wellesley, dated Deleytosa, 8 August, 1809. lose their discipline and spirit; they plunder even in presence of their officers. The officers are discontented, and are almost as bad as the men; and, with an army which a fortnight ago beat double their numbers, I should now hesitate to meet a French corps of half their strength.” The administration which has so often marked our campaigns with passages like this, cannot be too distinctly held up to view as a perpetual warning. No troops, as Sir Arthur wrote, can serve to any good purpose unless they are regularly fed; and yet it is in this very point—the question of supply—that our military history abounds with failures.
The army which had landed in England from Corunna was speedily organized, and sent back to Portugal. Sir J. Cradock commanded the troops at Lisbon, some 14,000 in number; Marshal Beresford had been appointed to the command of the Portuguese forces, and was assisted in his task of organizing them by several British officers. All arrangements were made for taking the field; and this was done immediately on the arrival of Sir Arthur Wellesley, who was appointed Marshal-General of the united armies. Colonel Kobe had remained in command of the Artillery in Portugal during the interval between Corunna and Sir Arthur’s arrival; but he was now superseded by Brigadier-General—afterwards Sir E.—Howorth. The number of troops and companies in the Peninsula in 1809 was only seven. There were, in addition, five at Gibraltar, five in Italy, and three in Malta.
The Artillery officers first appointed for duty with Marshal Beresford were Captain—afterwards Sir J.—May and Captain Elliot, of the Royal Artillery, and also Captain Arentschild, of the King’s German Artillery. Lieutenant Charles was attached to the Portuguese force raised by Sir Robert Wilson; and Captain P. Campbell and Lieutenant Wills were employed with the Spanish troops at Seville and Cadiz respectively.
General Howorth, on his arrival in Lisbon in the beginning of April, arranged, with Colonel Robe’s assistance, the equipment of five brigades of guns, to take the field with the army, viz., one brigade of heavy 6-pounders, three of light 6-pounders, and one of 3-pounders. These were all he could equip; and, notwithstanding the opportune arrival, from Ireland, of 170 drivers and 298 excellent horses, he yet complained of the want of mobility from which they suffered, mixed as they were with the horses of the country, mules, and oxen. However, like Colonel Harding, he took a cheerful view of matters, and pronounced the mules to be very fine To D.-A.-G. Lisbon, 8 April, 1809. animals, and “the oxen, though slow, a steady, good draught.” The development of the Field Artillery during the Peninsular War, from the wretched batteries employed at its commencement to those which attracted such admiration at its close, will appear in the course of this work. Suffice it, at present, to remind the Artilleryman, by way of contrast, while the picture of the batteries of 1809 is yet fresh in his recollection, that before the conclusion of the Peninsular War, it was admitted by the artillerymen of the country with which England was engaged in hostilities, ‘Le passé et l’avenir de l’Artillerie,’ tom. v. p. 64. that “the English matériel might have been taken as a model by any nation in Europe;”—that, shortly before Waterloo, Marshal Marmont remarked that the equipment of the English Field Artillery was in every respect very superior to anything he had ever seen; and that the French Committee appointed in 1818 to compare the Artillery of Hime. the various countries represented in the review held that year in Paris, expressed unqualified delight with that of England.