The evils as affecting the war and English alliance with Spain were obvious, but the two articles relating to the provision for Ferdinand’s father and mother, and to the future state of the Spaniards who had joined the French involved great interests. It was essential, he said, that the Spanish government should explicitly declare its intentions. Negociations for a general peace were said to be commenced, of that he knew nothing, but he supposed such being the case that a basis would be embodied in a preliminary treaty which all the belligerents would ratify, each power then to arrange its own peculiar treaty with France under protection of the general confederation. Napoleon would necessarily put forward his treaty with Ferdinand. It could be got rid of by the statement that the latter was a prisoner when negociating; but new articles would then have to be framed and therefore the Spanish government should be called upon previously to declare what their intentions were as to the two articles in the treaty of Valençay. His objections to them were that the allowance to Charles IV. was beyond the financial means of Spain, and were it not so, Napoleon should not be allowed to stipulate for any provision for him. Neither should he be suffered to embody or establish a permanent French party in Spain, under protection of a treaty, an article of which provided for the restoration of the Spaniards who had taken part with the French. It would give him the right, which he would not fail to exercise, of interfering in their favour in every question of property, or other interest, and the Spanish government would be involved in perpetual disputes with France. It was probable the allied sovereigns would be desirous of getting rid of this question and would think it desirable that Spain should pardon her rebellious subjects. For this reason he had before advised the Spanish government to publish a general amnesty, with the view of removing the difficulty when a general peace should come to be negociated, and this difficulty and danger be enhanced, if not before provided for, by the desire which each of the allied powers would feel, when negociating on their separate grounds, to save their finances by disbanding their armies.
This suggestion of an amnesty, made ten days before the battle of Vittoria, illustrates Wellington’s sagacity, his long and provident reach of mind, his discriminating and magnanimous mode of viewing the errors and weaknesses of human nature. Let it be remembered that in the full tide of success, after having passed the Douro, and when Joseph surprised and bewildered was flying before him, that he who had been called the iron duke in the midst of his bivouac fires, found time to consider, and had sufficient humanity and grandeur of mind thus to address the Spanish government on this subject.
“A large number of Spaniards who have taken the side of the French are now with the enemy’s army, many of these are highly meritorious and have rendered most essential service to the cause even during the period in which they have been in the service of the enemy. It is also a known fact that fear, the misery and distress which they suffered during the contest, and despair of the result, were the motives which induced many of these unfortunate persons to take the part which they have taken, and I would suggest for consideration whether it is expedient to involve the country in all the consequences of a rigid adherence to the existing law in order to punish such persons. I am the last man who will be found to diminish the merit of those Spaniards who have adhered to the cause of the country during the severe trial which I hope has passed, particularly of those, who, having remained amongst the enemy without entering their service, have served their country at the risk of their lives. But at the same time that I can appreciate the merits of these individuals and of the nation at large I can forgive the weakness of those who have been induced by terror by distress or by despair to pursue a different line of conduct.
“I entreat the government to advert to the circumstances of the commencement and of the different stages of this eventful contest, and to the numerous occasions in which all men must have imagined that it was impossible for the powers of the Peninsula, although aided by Great Britain, to withstand the colossal power by which they were assailed and nearly overcome. Let them reflect upon the weakness of the country at the commencement of the contest, upon the numerous and almost invariable disasters of the armies, and upon the ruin and disorganization that followed, and let them decide whether those who were witnesses of these events are guilty because they could not foresee what has since occurred. The majority are certainly not guilty in any other manner, and many now deemed guilty in the eye of the law as having served the pretended king have by that very act acquired the means of serving and have rendered important services to their country. It is my opinion that the policy of Spain should lead the government and the Cortez to grant a general amnesty with certain exceptions. This subject deserves consideration in the two views of failing or succeeding in freeing the country from its oppressors. If the effort fail the enemy will by an amnesty be deprived of the principal means now in his hands of oppressing the country in which his armies will be stationed; he will see clearly that he can place no reliance on any partizans in Spain, and he will not have even a pretence for supposing that the country is divided in opinion. If the effort succeed the object of the government should be to pacify the country and to heal the divisions which the contest has unavoidably occasioned. It is impossible to accomplish this object while there exists a great body of the Spanish nation, some possessing the largest property in the country and others endowed with considerable talents, who are proscribed for their conduct during the contest, conduct which has been caused by the misfortunes to which I have above adverted. These persons their friends and relations will if persecuted naturally endeavour to perpetuate the divisions in the country in the hope at some time to take advantage of them, and adverting to their number and to that power which they must derive from their property and connections it must be feared that they will be too successful.
“But there are other important views of this question. First should the effort to free the country from its oppressors succeed, at some time or other approaches to peace must be made between the two nations and the amnesty to the persons above described will remove the greatest difficulty in the way of such an arrangement. Secondly, should even Spain be at peace with France and the proscription against these persons be continued, they will remain in France a perpetual instrument in the hands of that restless power to disturb the internal tranquillity of Spain; and in case of a renewal of the war, which will be their wish and object, they will be the most mischievous and most inveterate enemies of their country, of that country which with mistaken severity aggravates her misfortunes by casting off from her thousands of her useful subjects. On every ground then it is desirable that the measure should be adopted and the present moment should be seized for adopting it.”
Then pointing out with great accuracy and justice those who should be exempted from an amnesty he thus terminated this record of his own true greatness, and of the littleness of the people to whom it was fruitlessly addressed.
“In bringing this subject under the consideration of the government I am perhaps intruding my opinion on a subject in which as a stranger I have no concern, but having had an advantage enjoyed by few of being acquainted with the concerns of the country since the commencement of the contest, and having been sensible both in the last and present campaign of the disadvantages suffered by Spain from the want of a measure of this description, I have thought it proper as a well-wisher to the cause to bring it under the consideration of the government assuring them at the same time that I have never had the slightest communication on the subject with the government of my country, nor do I believe that they have ever turned their attention to it. What I have above stated are my own opinions to which I may attribute more weight than they merit but they are founded upon a sincere devotion to the interests of the country.”
Such was the general political state of the Peninsula as bearing upon the military operations at the close of the year 1813, and the state of England and France shall be shewn in the next chapters. But however hateful and injurious to England the conduct of the Peninsular government appears, and however just and well-founded were the greatest part of lord Wellingtons complaints, it is not to be assumed that the Spanish government and Cortez were totally without excuse for their hostility or ingratitude. It was not solely upon military grounds that they were obnoxious to the English general. He united heartily with the English government in hatred of democratic institutions as opposed to aristocratic domination. Spain with the former seemed scarcely worth saving from France, and in a letter written about that period to the Conde de la Bispal, who it would appear proposed some immediate stroke of violence against the regency, he openly avows that he was inimical to the constitution, because it admitted a free press and refused to property any political influence beyond what naturally belonged to it. That is, it refused to heap undue honours privileges and power upon those who already possessed all the luxury and happiness which riches can bestow; it refused to admit the principle that those who have much should have more, that the indolence corruption and insolence naturally attendant upon wealth should be supported and increased by irresponsible power; that those who laboured and produced all things should enjoy nothing, that the rich should be tyrants and the poor slaves. But these essential principles of aristocratic government have never yet been, and never will be quietly received and submitted to by any thinking people: where they prevail there is no real freedom. Property inevitably confers power on its possessors, and far from adding to that natural power by political privileges it should be the object of all men who love liberty to balance it by raising the poorer classes to political importance: the influence and insolence of riches ought to be tamed and subdued instead of being inflated and excited by political institutions. This was the guiding principle of the most celebrated Greek legislators, the opposite principle produced the domestic dissensions of the Romans, and was the ruin of Carthage. It was the cause also of the French revolution. But after many years of darkness, the light of reason is now breaking forth again, and that ancient principle of justice which places the right of man in himself, above the right of property, is beginning to be understood. A clear perception of it has produced the American republic. France and Spain have admitted it and England ripens for its adoption. Yet pure and bright and beautiful and healthful as the light of freedom is in itself, it fell at this time on such foul and stagnant pools, such horrid repulsive objects, that millions turned at first from its radiance with disgust and wished for darkness again.