1º. Combat on the Coa.—The substance of Mr. Robinson’s complaint on this subject is, that I have imputed to general Picton, the odious crime of refusing, from personal animosity, to support general Craufurd;—that such a serious accusation should not be made without ample proof;—that I cannot say whether Picton’s instructions did not forbid him to aid Craufurd;—that the roads were so bad, the distance so great, and the time so short, Picton could not have aided him;—that my account of the action differs from general Craufurd’s;—that I was only a lieutenant of the forty-third, and consequently could know nothing of the matter;—that I have not praised Picton—that he was a Roman hero and so forth. Finally it is denied that Picton ever quarrelled with Craufurd at all; and that, so far from having an altercation with him on the day of the action he did not on that day even quit his own quarters at Pinhel. Something also there is about general Cole’s refusing to quit Guarda.
To all this I reply that I never did accuse general Picton of acting from personal animosity, and neither the letter nor the spirit of my statement will bear out such a meaning, which is a pure hallucination of this author. That the light division was not supported is notorious. The propriety of supporting it I have endeavoured to shew, the cause why it was not so supported I have not attempted to divine; yet it was neither the distance, nor the badness of the roads, nor the want of time; for the action, which took place in July, lasted from day-break until late in the evening, the roads, and there were several, were good at that season, and the distance not more than eight miles.
It is quite true, as Mr. Robinson observes, that I cannot affirm of my own knowledge whether the duke of Wellington forbade Picton to succour Craufurd, but I can certainly affirm that he ordered him to support him because it is so set down in his grace’s despatches, volume 5th, pages 535 and 547; and it is not probable that this order should have been rescinded and one of a contrary tendency substituted, to meet an event, namely the action on the Coa, which Craufurd had been forbidden to fight. Picton acted no doubt upon the dictates of his judgment, but all men are not bound to approve of that judgment; and as to the charge of faintly praising his military talents, a point was forced by me in his favour, when I compared him to general Craufurd of whose ability there was no question; more could not be done in conscience, even under Mr. Robinson’s assurance that he was a Roman hero.
The exact object of Mr. Robinson’s reasoning upon the subject of general Cole’s refusal to quit Guarda it is difficult to discover; but the passage to which it relates, is the simple enunciation of a fact, which is now repeated, namely, that general Cole being requested by general Craufurd to come down with his whole division to the Coa, refused, and that lord Wellington approved of that refusal, though he ordered Cole to support Craufurd under certain circumstances. Such however is Mr. Robinson’s desire to monopolize all correctness, that he will not permit me to know any thing about the action, though I was present, because, as he says, being only a lieutenant, I could not know any thing about it. He is yet abundantly satisfied with the accuracy of his own knowledge, although he was not present, and was neither a captain nor lieutenant. I happened to be a captain of seven years standing, but surely, though we should admit all subalterns to be blind, like young puppies, and that rank in the one case, as age in the other, is absolutely necessary to open their eyes, it might still be asked, why I should not have been able, after having obtained a rank which gave me the right of seeing, to gather information from others as well as Mr. Robinson? Let us to the proof.
In support of his views, he has produced, the rather vague testimony of an anonymous officer, on general Picton’s staff, which he deems conclusive as to the fact, that Picton never quarrelled with Craufurd, that he did not even quit Pinhel on the day of the action, and consequently could not have had any altercation with him on the Coa. But the following letters from officers on Craufurd’s staff, not anonymous, shew that Picton did all these things. In fine that Mr. Robinson has undertaken a task for which he is not qualified.
Testimony of lieutenant-colonel Shaw Kennedy, who was on general Craufurd’s staff at the action of the Coa, July 24, 1810.
“Manchester, 7th November, 1835.
“I have received your letter in which you mention ‘Robinson’s Life of Picton;’ that work I have not seen. It surprises me that any one should doubt that Picton and Craufurd met on the day the French army invested Almeida in 1810. I was wounded previously, and did not therefore witness their interview; but I consider it certain that Picton and Craufurd did meet on the 24th July, 1810, on the high ground on the left bank of the Coa during the progress of the action, and that a brisk altercation took place between them. They were primed and ready for such an altercation, as angry communications had passed between them previously regarding the disposal of some sick of the light division. I have heard Craufurd mention in joke his and Picton’s testiness with each other, and I considered that he alluded both to the quarrel as to the sick; and to that which occurred when they met during the action at Almeida.
“J. S. Kennedy.”