A general court-martial was held at Chelsea Hospital, on Lieutenant-General Whitelocke, on January 28, 1808. Its members included the conqueror of Agra and Lasswarree, and the future hero of Coruña. They were General the Right Hon. Sir W. Medows, General the Hon. Chapel Norton, General Viscount Lake, General Hulse, General Ogilvie, General Cuyler, Lieutenant-General the Right Hon. H. E. Fox, Lieutenant-General Sir James Duff, Knight; Lieutenant-General Harris, Lieutenant-General Viscount Cathcart, Lieutenant-General Dundas, Lieutenant-General Ross, Lieutenant-General Pigot, Lieutenant-General Sir George Nugent, Bart.; Lieutenant-General Loftus, Lieutenant-General Wilford, Lieutenant-General Garth, Lieutenant-General Lloyd, Lieutenant-General Stavely, Lieutenant-General Sir John Moore, K.B.
First Charge.—That Lieutenant-General Whitelocke, having received instructions from his Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State to proceed for the reduction of the province of Buenos Ayres, pursued measures ill calculated to facilitate that conquest; that when the Spanish Commander had shown such symptoms of a disposition to treat, as to express a desire to communicate with Major-General Gower, the second in command, upon the subject of terms, the said Lieutenant-General Whitelocke did return a message, in which he demanded, amongst other articles, the surrender of all persons holding civil offices in the government of Buenos Ayres, as prisoners of war: that the said Lieutenant-General Whitelocke, in making such an offensive and unusual demand, tending to exasperate the inhabitants of Buenos Ayres, to produce and encourage a spirit of resistance to his Majesty’s arms, to exclude the hope of amicable accommodation, and to increase the difficulties of the service with which he was intrusted, acted in a manner unbecoming his duty as an officer, prejudicial to military discipline, and contrary to the articles of war.
Second Charge.—That the said Lieutenant-General Whitelocke, after the landing of the troops at Enseñada, and during the march from thence to the town of Buenos Ayres, did not make the military arrangements best calculated to ensure the success of his operations against the town, and that having known, previously to his attack upon the town of Buenos Ayres upon the 5th July 1807, as appears from his public despatch of the 10th of July, that the enemy meant to occupy the flat roofs of the houses, he did nevertheless, in the said attack, divide his forces into several brigades and parts, and ordered the whole to be unloaded, and no firing to be permitted on any account; and, under this order, to march into the principal streets of the town unprovided with proper and sufficient means for forcing the barricadoes, whereby the troops were unnecessarily exposed to destruction, without the possibility of making effectual opposition such conduct betraying great professional incapacity on the part of the said Lieutenant-General Whitelocke, tending to lessen the confidence of the troops in the judgment of their officers, being derogatory to the honour of His Majesty’s arms, contrary to his duty as an officer, prejudicial to good order and military discipline, and contrary to the articles of war.
Third Charge.—That the said Lieutenant-General did not make, although it was in his power, any effectual attempt by his own personal exertion or otherwise, to co-operate with, or support, the different divisions of the army under his command, when engaged with the enemy in the streets of Buenos Ayres on the 5th of July 1807; whereby those troops, after having encountered and surmounted a constant and well-directed fire, and having effected the purport of their orders, were left without aid and support, or further orders, and considerable detachments under Lieutenant-Colonel Duff and Brigadier-General Craufurd were thereby compelled to surrender; such conduct on the part of the said Lieutenant-General Whitelocke tending to the defeat and dishonour of his Majesty’s arms, to lessen the confidence of the troops in the skill and courage of their officers, being unbecoming and disgraceful to his character as an officer, prejudicial to good order and military discipline, and contrary to the articles of war.
Fourth Charge.—That the said Lieutenant-General Whitelocke, subsequent to the attack upon the town of Buenos Ayres, and at a time when the troops under his command were in possession of posts on each flank of the town, and of the principal arsenal, with a communication open to the fleet, and having an effective force of upwards of 5000 men, did enter into, and finally conclude a treaty with the enemy, whereby he acknowledges in the public despatch of the 10th of July 1807—“That he resolved to forego the advantages which the bravery of his troops had obtained, and which advantages had cost him about 2500 men in killed, wounded, and prisoners;” and by such treaty he unnecessarily and shamefully surrendered all such advantages, totally evacuated the town of Buenos Ayres, and consented to deliver, and did shamefully abandon and deliver up to the enemy the strong fortress of Monte Video, which had been committed to his charge, and which, at the period of the treaty and abandonment, was well and sufficiently garrisoned and provided against attack, and which was not, at such period, in a state of blockade or siege; such conduct on the part of the said Lieutenant-General Whitelocke tending to the dishonour of his Majesty’s arms, and being contrary to his duty as an officer, prejudicial to good order and military discipline, and contrary to the articles of war.
The proceedings of the court-martial on Lieutenant-General Whitelocke fill a volume of 671 pages, from which I give the following extracts:—
In opening the case the Judge-Advocate described it as being “the most important occasion, in the military history of the country, that ever called for inquiry of a nature like the present.” The expedition, he said, had not only totally failed, with the lamentable loss of a great proportion of the gallant army engaged in it, but it ended in the absolute surrender of those valuable advantages which the valour of British troops under another commander had previously acquired in the important post of Monte Video. “By this most unfortunate event,” he said, “all the hopes have been defeated which had been justly and generally entertained, of discovering new markets for our manufactures, of giving a wider scope to the spirit and enterprise of our merchants, of opening new sources of treasure, and new fields for exertion in supplying either the rude wants of countries emerging from barbarism, or the artificial and increasing demands of luxury and refinement, in those remote quarters of the globe. Important as these objects must be at all times to this country, the state of Europe, and the attempts that have been daily making to exclude us from our accustomed intercourse with the Continent, have added to the importance of these objects, and to the disappointment of these hopes.
“The disappointment has been cruelly embittered by the disgrace which such a failure, under all the circumstances, has attached to the British arms. The diminution of our military fame must be felt at all times as a great national calamity, but at no period so severely as in this crisis of the world, when our military character has become more essential than ever, not merely for our honour or our glory, but for the independence, the liberties, the existence of Great Britain. It is, however, a great consolation, that whatever may have been the stain which our military renown has received, the conduct of the troops has had no share in producing it. I believe, the more this attack of the 5th of July is examined, the more clearly it will be found that no troops ever showed more courage; that no officers (with the exception of whatever may turn out to be connected with the subject of these charges, and I hope the result of this inquiry may prove the exception to be undeserved), but, with that exception, that no officers ever displayed more zeal, more conduct, more devotion of themselves to the common cause in the course of the most triumphant engagement, than was displayed by the British officers through the whole of that destructive day.... But it is not upon reports that these charges are founded; they rest upon better evidence. They are taken, not from idle talk or vain rumour, but the orders and despatches of General Whitelocke himself. There is not a fact alleged against him which is not derived from his authority. The character assigned to these facts does, indeed, invoke imputations of the most grave and serious nature; but the facts themselves are founded upon his own account of his own conduct; so much so, that I might be well warranted in contenting myself, on the part of the public, with laying the orders and the despatches of General Whitelocke before you as documents, of themselves, and without any other evidence, abundantly sufficient to call upon him for his defence. He is his own accuser: he has furnished the strongest testimony against himself.”
Copy of a letter from Lieutenant-General Whitelocke, to the Right Honourable William Windham, dated Buenos Ayres, July 10th, 1807.