duct of his Majesty's ministers. The noble earl may not approve of our measures, so neither do I approve of his counsels: I do not approve of those sublime operations in Egypt, at Buenos Ayres, at Constantinople, and other places, that emanated from the wisdom of those with whom the noble earl has been used to act. Upon the whole, I have the satis faction, in common with the rest of his Majesty's government, to reflect, that, whatever may be the consequences of the struggle we are embarked in, we have not lost the confidence of the Spanish people; we know that every true Spanish heart beats high for this country; we know that whatever shall happen, they do not accuse us. Submission may be the lot they are fated to endure in the end; but they do not impute to us the cause of their misfortunes: they are sensible that neither the thirst after commerce, nor territory, nor security, is to be imputed to us, in the assistance we have afforded to them upon this important occasion. Whatever may be the result, we have done our duty, we have not despair. ed, we have persevered, and will do so to the last, while there is any thing left to contend for with a prospect of success.'

Lord

The whole strength of the debate was comprised in these speeches. Earl Moira and Viscount Sidmouth, in supporting the motion of censure, both declared that they did not despair of the Spanish cause. Erskine spoke with great intemperance. "It would have been better," he said, "for the service of the country, if the men who lost their lives in the last campaign had been shot in St James's Park. They were sent to Spain to be massacred, without any prospect of their being able to

do any good. The ardour of the Spaniards had wholly subsided. He could prove that Sir David Baird wrote to ministers an account of the

apathy and want of spirit among that people; and that ministers had received the communication when they were pressing Sir John Moore to advance." Had not Lord Erskine suffered party feeling to blind his judgment, every day's intelligence from Spain would have taught him at this time how totally Sir David Baird had erred in his opinion. Lord Grenville affirmed, "that ministers were endeavouring to throw the blame off themselves, and transfer it to Sir John Moore, who could not now speak in his own justification. Such conduct," he hoped, "would not lessen the ardour and zeal of the army, on which the salvation of the country so greatly depended." 92 lords voted for the motion: it was negatived by 145.

When next the lords met, Earl Darnley asked April 24. "whether it was the intention of ministers to recal Mr Frere? He had heard that it was, and if so, he should be satisfied; but if not, he considered the conduct of that ambassador to have been so improper towards Sir John Moore, that he should feel it his duty to call the attention of their lordships to the subject.” The Earl of Liverpool replied, "he was ready to vouch for the zeal and ability of Mr Frere, and was convinced his intentions were good; but both he and his colleagues, as they had before stated, were of opinior, that, so far as related to the circumstance mentioned respecting Sir John Moore, he had adopted an improper mode of carrying his intentions into effect." Here the subject was dropt in the Upper House. It was then taken

up in the Commons, where April 27. Mr Eden moved for a copy of the letter from Morla and Castel-Franco to Sir John Moore; and also for any information of which government might be in possession relative thereto, or relative to the two letters of Mr Frere to General Moore, dated from Talavera, December 3d, 1808, and to the message which was stated to have accompanied those let. ters. "On the very day," he said, "on which Morla wrote to Sir John Moore, requesting him to advance to Madrid, he had an interview with the French commanders; three days afterwards he considered all resistance as useless; and on the 5th (the day when Sir John Moore received the letter) the French were in possession of Madrid. Morla's conduct, therefore, justified a suspicion that it was his wish to decoy the British army into the power of the French; and if that was his design, he could not have desired an instrument more likely to forward it than the letter written by Mr Frere. The situation of Sir John Moore was truly distressing. He found himself at the head of a British army in a foreign country, placed in such circumstances (through no fault of his) that he could not be cheered with any reasonable prospect of success. He knew the extravagant notions of Spanish enthusiasm which at that time so generally prevailed in England, and was aware of the censure he must in all probability incur, if he consulted the safety of his army, by quitting the country without making any farther effort in the cause. Yet, happily, superior to all these afflicting reflections, the gallant general determined to brave the transient obloquy that menaced him, by preserving his men. To this resolve we might attribute his avoiding

the snare; but though the whole of his army were not decoyed into the power of the French, the disastrous battle of Coruna might be ascribed to these circumstances."

In reply to this, Mr Canning said he had already communicated to Mr Eden that it was impossible to comply with his motion, because government had no such papers to produce. He left the House, therefore, to judge of the candour of that honourable gentleman, under these circumstances. who seemed to have taken this occasion to throw out insinuations against Mr Frere, before the time for discussing the subject altogether had arrived. Mr Canning added, he had heard this with feelings which he would not trust himself to express. When the proper moment came, he would endeavour to discharge his public duties, and those of private friendship. Upon this Mr Tierney observed, that it was extremely proper to move for these papers, even though government had them not to produce; for it was very important to know that there were no such docu- ' ments, a fact which did not operate in favour of Mr Frere. Mr Canning replied, the fact was, that Mr Frere accompanied the junta when they left Madrid, and could have known nothing of Charmilly, or Morla's letter, had it not been that the junta stopt at Talavera, on their way to Seville. There Charmilly found him, when on his way with a direct communication to Sir John Moore, never intended to be forwarded through Mr Frere-The conversation then turned upon M. Charmilly. Lord Castlereagh said there was no foundation for the report that Charmilly went to Spain with a recommendation from him. He had indeed applied to be sent, but had

been told that they did not know of any service in which he could be wanted. General Tarleton then rose, to shew how utterly unworthy of any trust or credit this M. Charmilly was. "He had refused," he said, "to pay to a Mr Devereux some money which he had lost to him at play, upon the pretence that he was a ruined man; although, as had been afterwards ascertained, he certainly had the means of paying. Now, when this Colonel Charmilly was charged with his conduct to Mr Devereux, what did he do? Why, simply denied ever having played with him at all. The business was not proceeded in, owing to the interference of a very respectable man, the Comte de Vandreuil, who represented the total ruin in which it must involve Charmilly. Such was the person whom Mr Frere chose to authorise to interfere with Sir John Moore."

Mr Eden's motion was, of course, negatived without a division. A motion of Mr AberApril. 27. crombie's, on the same day, for copies of the general orders issued by Sir John Moore in Spain, was not more successful. "His object in moving for them," he said, "was that the character of that gallant and highly-lamented officer might appear in its true colours." Lord Castlereagh replied, "that sorry as he should be to refuse any papers which might be thought necessary to vindicate the character of that gallant general, he must resist the motion: First, because the executive government could not comply with it: no such papers were in his office, nor did he know where they were, unless they might be in possession of the adjutant-general in Spain; secondly, because he thought it a serious question of pru

dence, whether such papers ought to be called for. The orders of generals to the army under their command were conveyed in a tone which might be necessary to keep up discipline, but might not perhaps be quite consonant to the feelings of the House, and should not therefore be made public." Mr Abercrombie answered, "that he thought these objections. were of no weight. As to the first, it would be easy for the order of that House to be directed to the adjutant-general, and he would find out where the papers were: As to the second, there could not certainly be any object upon which the House ought more to wish to be well informed, than the state of the discipline of the army. Sure he was, that General Moore never wrote or expressed a sentiment relative to the army under his command, which he would not have published, and wished to be known to the whole world. It was well known that considerable alarm had gone abroad respecting the disorder and want of discipline in his army, particularly during the retreat, and that this want of discipline was not owing to him. Now, if those orders were made public, they would show plainly and clearly that the fault was not with him. If Lord Castlereagh meant that they should not be known to the public, and if it were true, as Lord Castlereagh admitted, that every thing was done by Sir John Moore, in the retreat from Sahagun to Coruna, that could have been done by the ablest general in any service, then the argument amounted to this :-You must not hurt the feelings of the army, but you may sacrifice the honour and character of the officer who commanded. If any thing had been done by the gallant officer in question which

was at all faulty, it was entirely ow ing to ministers; and as he had, unfortunately for the country, fallen a sacrifice to the situation in which he had been placed by them, or by their adherents, it was extremely hard to sacrifice his character, as well as his life, to screen themselves." Mr Horner thought the orders ought to be produced, to enlighten the public on a question so important. They were, however, refused, not only because an inquiry into the subject would be invidious, but also because it would be unnecessary, satisfied as the public were of the propriety of Sir John Moore's conduct. There was, indeed, another reason, which, to any person unacquainted with the forms of the House of Commons, would have appeared perfectly satisfactory-the whole of these orders had been already published in the newspapers. This Mr Abercrombie himself stated, adding, "that if they were refused, the House would be the only place in which they would not be known." Parliament is supposed to be ignorant of all public papers which are not regularly laid before it, and this fiction was reasoned upon as a fact!

the kind of provision alluded to; but on this being intimated to the female part of the family, they expressed a wish that any provision intended for them might be transferred to a male branch; and it was therefore the intention of ministers to recommend that it should be made for that brother of Sir John Moore whom the rest of the family wished to receive it. Accordingly a pension of 10001. a-year was granted to Mr James Moore, elder brother of the general, who afterwards published a Narrative of his Campaign.

On the following day, a motion of censure simi- May. 9. lar to that of Earl Grey was brought forward in the Lower House by Earl Temple. He began his speech by a panegyric upon Sir John Moore. "While the House lamented," he said, "that the last campaign had so miserably failed, it was not to the army that they were to look for the cause of the failure, nor to the commander-in-chief of that army; for upon him they had bestowed the proudest monument of his conduct whilst living, and most exalted tribute to his memory when dead. But it was not to the cold marble, to the still honours of the tomb, to the lifeless monument which may have been erected, or to the distinguished inscription it may bear, that they were to look for the character of Sir John Moore. His monument was the ground upon which he fell; and he had a still more envi able living monument in the breasts of those brave troops among whom, as he had ever fondly lived, so he had bravely terminated his glorious career. It was not to his actions, then, that they were to look for the cause of those disasters which had unfortunately attended the progress of the campaign :

over his actions the tomb had closed --and who should venture, with unhallowed hands, to tear open the sanctuary of the tomb? Who should dare to rake up the ashes of the illustrious dead, for the purpose of patching up a lame and impotent justifica tion for the errors, incapacity, and misconduct of the guilty living? It was not then upon the conduct of the army that the House was to pronounce judgement, but upon those persons whose incapacity and misconduct were the cause why even British valour had failed of success." His lordship then proceeded to examine the conduct of the campaign. He repeated the objections so often made to the employment of an army in Portugal-objections which had been so triumphantly refuted; and he delivered it as his opinion, that that army might have been more beneficially employed, conjointly with our maritime force in Catalonia and in Biscay, where they might have occupied Barcelona and St Sebastian; or that they should have been sent to the south, where they might have taken post with the Sierra Morena in their front, the Guadalquivir on one flank, and Cadiz in their rear. Having discussed this part of the subject, and the arrangements for Sir John Moore's expedition till he reached. Salamanca, his lordship came to the interference of Mr Frere, the main ground of his attack. "And now," he said," he hoped the country would be enabled fairly to appreciate the services of that gentleman. He trusted, also, that gentlemen on the other side would not forget the various ways in which they had endeavoured to conceal the evidence on this branch of the case; how it had been wrung from them like drops of blood; and the twists, and turns, and

VOL. II. PART I.

shifts after which it had at length been extorted from them. First, they did not know of such a correspondence; then it was private. Would any of those gentlemen, with unblushing front, now assert that any of these letters were private ? Had they the mark 'private' upon them; and even if they had such a mark, could any man suppose that they were any thing else than a public record of the business of his mission? They were not only public, but were meant to be so. Then they were said to be of no consequence; they had nothing to do with Sir John Moore's retreat, and very little with his advance; and if produced, they would not answer the purpose for which they were called for, as they contained no information that would be of the smallest advantage to the discussion. Were they really unimportant? On the contrary, were they not the sole and only cause of that gallant and lamented officer's advance? It was solely on account of them that he found it his duty to make that advance. Mr Frere advises him to advance, and to join his troops to the Spaniards; informing him, that, by doing so, he would save the capital. This he writes on the very day when one of the entrances to the town was seized on by the French: Buonaparte himself was then only 17 miles from Madrid, and the next day was at the gates. He was not surprised that Mr Canning wished to conceal such letters as these, so derogatory to the character of the person by whom they were written, though on his own account he might wish to shew that there was another person who had the same lack of information, and the same ignorance as himself. There was, however, another reason which might induce the right

D