He had signified his willingness to withdraw from Buenos Aires in forty-eight hours and from Montevideo in two months. As the Judge-Advocate remarked at the subsequent trial: "He is his own accuser: he has furnished the strongest testimony against himself." The English army sailed from Buenos Aires on July 12th, from Montevideo on September 9, 1807.

Seldom has there been such a fine army and such splendid officers under such a pusillanimous commander. A young officer[47] on the staff remarks that on many of the street corners in Montevideo was written: "General Whitelocke is either a coward or a traitor! Perhaps both!" He also tells us: "All the English merchants are in an uproar. They say the losses will be immense; that upwards of three millions worth of property is on its way to this country, and that, if it is given up, half the merchants in England will be ruined. God knows what will be the result of this unfortunate affair. It appears to me one of the most severe blows that England has ever received." Whittingham adds, with some penetration, that "the period of a revolution" was "not far distant."

It is some small consolation that the court-martials administered even-handed justice. The most important tribunal adjudged "that the said Lieutenant-General Whitelocke be cashiered, and declared totally unfit and unworthy to serve his Majesty in any military capacity whatever." On the other hand Popham, who had disobeyed his orders in initiating the whole scheme, was severely reprimanded, but received a sword of honour from the City of London and a few months later was given an important command.

Sir David Baird, who had sanctioned Popham's adventure, was censured and recalled from the Cape, but he also was given the chief command of the very same expedition as Popham—that against Copenhagen. It is certain that public opinion would not have sanctioned any severe measures against officers who had been zealous in the South American attempt.

The most noticeable point throughout the whole affair is the eagerness of the English commercial world, which was dreading the loss of the Continental markets and was rightly convinced that the discovery of new outlets was a matter of life and death.

The remarks of the Judge-Advocate condense the whole case: "By this most unfortunate event 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." It is, perhaps, doubtful whether England could have held any considerable territory in Argentina, for a revolutionary spirit was rapidly being wafted into South America from Europe, and though the population was small the country was vast, and if the population had continued hostile the difficulty of either conciliating or conquering them would have been immense. But, doubtless, the retention of Montevideo and the territory now called Uruguay would have been feasible, and would have been highly beneficial both to England and South America. To have had one country in South America governed upon liberal and conservative principles, with an enlightened system of commerce and complete security for life and property, would have been an incalculable benefit, and would undoubtedly been a salutary check upon the wars and revolutions which have devastated South America since the overthrow of the Spanish dominion.

CHAPTER VII
THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE

When the English retired from Buenos Aires and Montevideo there seemed no reason to expect any change in the relations between Argentina and the mother country. The Spanish rule was not rigorous, and, from a financial point of view, its policy was now highly favourable to the colonists. They also warmly sympathised with their European kinsmen in the apparently hopeless struggle against the oppression of Napoleon. When Charles IV. abdicated in 1808, all the Spanish-American dependencies hailed Ferdinand VII. as their King with enthusiasm. Nothing seemed less likely than any kind of disloyalty. And yet a very few years saw the beginning of a struggle which ended in an old and haughty nation being stripped of every one of the dominions she possessed on the American continent, and sinking into a state of lethargy and decay from which, after the lapse of a century, there seems little prospect of a "Roman recovery." The causes of this strange phenomenon certainly do not seem adequate. It is, of course, obvious that the weakness of the Home Government and their own successful repulse of the English showed the Argentines that if they had the will to be independent there was no doubt about the power. Again, their sense of importance could not but be increased by the eagerness with which foreigners sought for a share in their trade, and Cisneros, the Viceroy, had strengthened this impression by admitting neutrals unreservedly to the South American trade—a step which he took with great reluctance. But neither of these circumstances could have had any effect if goodwill and loyalty had remained unimpaired. These had probably been undermined by the jealousy between Creole and Spaniard, by the pride of caste shown by the latter towards the former, and by the preference always given to Spaniards in the matter of official appointments. As the people of Argentina increased in consciousness of worth and power, they would be the less willing to brook this assumption of superiority, and doubtless hot-headed young men had frequently discussed the possibility of the step for which the cant term is now "cutting the painter." There is a further circumstance which may have had influence on the course of events. Able and ambitious men could not but see that in the turmoil of revolution, followed by independence, there was a prospect of unbounded riches, and power, which, however speculative, is always more attractive to such minds than to be seated in the mean. Indeed a certain Francisco Miranda from Caracas, ex-volunteer in Washington's army, had, at the close of the war, discussed Spanish emancipation with Washington himself. He then visited Europe, fought in the French revolutionary army, and actually attained to the rank of general. His efforts subsequently to induce Pitt or President Adams to initiate a war of liberation in South America were, however, unsuccessful, but his constant intrigues with Spanish Americans show that the project was undoubtedly in the air.

Yet when we have gone over the meagre list of possible causes, we cannot but attribute the chief place to one which strengthened all the circumstances favourable to change and neutralised or reversed those which were unfavourable. This was the doctrine of the Rights of Man or, to be plain, the revolutionary spirit itself. Its influence was felt by all classes, and it caused ferment and bloodshed in such widely different places as Ireland and the West Indies. It had already invaded England, and afterwards attacked her ancient rival and overthrew the French monarchy and trampled down the French Church. Thus, this purely moral cause must be taken as the efficient factor of the Spanish-American Revolution; the others could have effected nothing had not the seemingly barren dogma of equality provided an atmosphere and a soil ready to foster any revolutionary seed that might find its way to South America.