CHAPTER XI.

Napoleon’s plans of campaign.—His letter to Ney, and proclamation to the Belgians.—His sanguine expectations, and utter disappointment.—Opinions of French authors on the circumstance of Napoleon’s not reaching Brussels.—Their inconsistencies.—Desire of Napoleon to make his marshals responsible for errors he committed.—Opinion of M. de Vaulabelle.—Napoleon’s charges against Grouchy; impossibility of the latter’s preventing a portion of the Prussians reaching the field of Waterloo.—The Emperor’s charges against Ney refuted.—Admirable conduct of Ney during the campaign.—Mode of history-writing at St.-Helena.—The battle not fought against the French nation.—Napoleon’s character.—Motley composition and equivocal loyalty of part of the allied army.—Refutation of the charge that the Duke was taken by surprise; credulity of some English writers on this subject.—His Grace’s admirable precaution.—Foreign statements, that the Prussians saved us, examined.—The tardy cooperation of the Prussians produced, not the defeat, but the total rout of the French.—Conversation of Napoleon at St.-Helena.—Gourgaud’s account.—Opinions of the Duke and lord Hill.—Ney’s testimony in the Chamber of Peers.

What were Napoleon’s plans, and how sanguine were his expectations, will be placed beyond all doubt by the following letter, written to the prince de la Moskowa, the renowned Ney, who had joined the army but the evening before, and by his proclamation addressed to the Belgians.

To the Prince de la Moskowa.

“Charleroi, June 16th, 1815.“COUSIN,“I send you the present letter by my aide-de-camp, general Flahaut. The Major-General (Soult) must have already dispatched orders to you, but you will receive these sooner, because my officers are faster than his. You will receive the general order of the day; but I wish to write to you in detail, because it is of the very highest importance.“I advance marshal Grouchy with the third and fourth corps of infantry upon Sombreffe, and my guard upon Fleurus,where I shall be in person before mid-day. If I find the enemy there, I shall attack him, and drive everything before me as far as Gembloux. There I shall decide, according to the events of the morning, what is to be done. My decision will be made, perhaps at three o’clock, perhaps in the evening. My intention is, that the moment I have determined on my plan, you should be in readiness to march on Brussels. I will support you with the guard, which will be at Fleurus or at Sombreffe; and I should like to reach Brussels to-morrow morning. You should set forward this evening, if I can form my plan in time for you to hear from me to-day, and you should march three or four leagues before night, and be in Brussels at seven to-morrow morning.“You can dispose of your troops in the following manner: One division two leagues in advance of Quatre-Bras, if there should be no obstacle: Six divisions of infantry about Quatre-Bras, and one division at Marbais, in order that I may have its assistance, should I want it, at Sombreffe; but this is not to delay your march: Count de Valmy’s corps, which contains three thousand cuirassiers ofélite, at the intersection of the Roman way with the Brussels road, in case I should need it; as soon as ever I have formed my plan, you will order this division to rejoin you.“I should like to have with me the division of the guard which is commanded by general Lefebvre-Desnouettes, and I send you in exchange the two divisions of count de Valmy’s corps. But, according to my plans at this moment, I prefer posting count de Valmy in such a manner as to have him within reach if I want him, and to avoid causing general Lefebvre-Desnouettes any false marches; for it is probable that I shall resolve upon marching with the guard this evening upon Brussels.“Nevertheless, cover Lefebvre’s division by the two divisions of cavalry belonging to D’Erlon and Reille, in order to spare the guard; for if there should be any hot work with the English, it is better that it should be with our line than the guard.“I have adopted as a general principle of this campaign, to divide my army into two wings, and a reserve.“Your wing will consist of the four divisions of the firstcorps, of the four divisions of the second corps, of two divisions of light cavalry, and the two divisions of count de Valmy’s corps. The number of these troops cannot be much less than forty-five or fifty thousand men. Marshal Grouchy will have nearly an equal number, and will command the right wing. The guard will form the reserve, and I shall bring it up in support of the one wing or the other, according to circumstances. The Major-General will issue the most precise orders, in order to secure obedience to you, when you have a separate command: whenever I am present, the commanders of corps will receive orders directly from me. I shall draw troops, according to circumstances, from either wing, to strengthen my reserve.“You well understand the importance attached tothe taking of Brussels. It may also produce important results; for a movement of such promptitude and daring will cut off the English troops at Mons, Ostend, etc.“I wish your measures to be so taken, that, at the first order, your eight divisions may be able to march rapidly on Brussels, without any difficulty.“Napoleon.”

“Charleroi, June 16th, 1815.

“COUSIN,

“I send you the present letter by my aide-de-camp, general Flahaut. The Major-General (Soult) must have already dispatched orders to you, but you will receive these sooner, because my officers are faster than his. You will receive the general order of the day; but I wish to write to you in detail, because it is of the very highest importance.

“I advance marshal Grouchy with the third and fourth corps of infantry upon Sombreffe, and my guard upon Fleurus,where I shall be in person before mid-day. If I find the enemy there, I shall attack him, and drive everything before me as far as Gembloux. There I shall decide, according to the events of the morning, what is to be done. My decision will be made, perhaps at three o’clock, perhaps in the evening. My intention is, that the moment I have determined on my plan, you should be in readiness to march on Brussels. I will support you with the guard, which will be at Fleurus or at Sombreffe; and I should like to reach Brussels to-morrow morning. You should set forward this evening, if I can form my plan in time for you to hear from me to-day, and you should march three or four leagues before night, and be in Brussels at seven to-morrow morning.

“You can dispose of your troops in the following manner: One division two leagues in advance of Quatre-Bras, if there should be no obstacle: Six divisions of infantry about Quatre-Bras, and one division at Marbais, in order that I may have its assistance, should I want it, at Sombreffe; but this is not to delay your march: Count de Valmy’s corps, which contains three thousand cuirassiers ofélite, at the intersection of the Roman way with the Brussels road, in case I should need it; as soon as ever I have formed my plan, you will order this division to rejoin you.

“I should like to have with me the division of the guard which is commanded by general Lefebvre-Desnouettes, and I send you in exchange the two divisions of count de Valmy’s corps. But, according to my plans at this moment, I prefer posting count de Valmy in such a manner as to have him within reach if I want him, and to avoid causing general Lefebvre-Desnouettes any false marches; for it is probable that I shall resolve upon marching with the guard this evening upon Brussels.

“Nevertheless, cover Lefebvre’s division by the two divisions of cavalry belonging to D’Erlon and Reille, in order to spare the guard; for if there should be any hot work with the English, it is better that it should be with our line than the guard.

“I have adopted as a general principle of this campaign, to divide my army into two wings, and a reserve.

“Your wing will consist of the four divisions of the firstcorps, of the four divisions of the second corps, of two divisions of light cavalry, and the two divisions of count de Valmy’s corps. The number of these troops cannot be much less than forty-five or fifty thousand men. Marshal Grouchy will have nearly an equal number, and will command the right wing. The guard will form the reserve, and I shall bring it up in support of the one wing or the other, according to circumstances. The Major-General will issue the most precise orders, in order to secure obedience to you, when you have a separate command: whenever I am present, the commanders of corps will receive orders directly from me. I shall draw troops, according to circumstances, from either wing, to strengthen my reserve.

“You well understand the importance attached tothe taking of Brussels. It may also produce important results; for a movement of such promptitude and daring will cut off the English troops at Mons, Ostend, etc.

“I wish your measures to be so taken, that, at the first order, your eight divisions may be able to march rapidly on Brussels, without any difficulty.

“Napoleon.”

PROCLAMATION TO THE BELGIANS AND INHABITANTS OF THE LEFT BANK OF THE RHINE[84].... “The ephemeral success of my enemies detached you for a moment from my Empire: in my exile upon a rock in the sea, I heard your complaints. The God of battle has decided the fate of your beautiful provinces; Napoleon is among you. You are worthy to be Frenchmen. Rise in mass, join my invincible phalanxes, to exterminate the remainder of those barbarians, who are your enemies and mine; they fly with rage and despair in their hearts.“(Signed)Napoleon.“By the Emperor:“The major-general of the army,“CountBertrand.“At the Imperial Palace of Laeken.”

PROCLAMATION TO THE BELGIANS AND INHABITANTS OF THE LEFT BANK OF THE RHINE[84].

... “The ephemeral success of my enemies detached you for a moment from my Empire: in my exile upon a rock in the sea, I heard your complaints. The God of battle has decided the fate of your beautiful provinces; Napoleon is among you. You are worthy to be Frenchmen. Rise in mass, join my invincible phalanxes, to exterminate the remainder of those barbarians, who are your enemies and mine; they fly with rage and despair in their hearts.

“(Signed)Napoleon.

“By the Emperor:“The major-general of the army,“CountBertrand.

“At the Imperial Palace of Laeken.”

Little comment need be made upon this letter and proclamation. They are characteristic of Napoleon. A most able plan of operations is developed with his usual recklessness of human life: we see him prepared to sacrifice his troops of the line to save his guard; and either wing, so that with the other he might make a dash at Brussels.

His overweening confidence of being there even early on the 17th, and his sanguine expectations that the population would support him, are clearly shown by the above documents.

Napoleon must evidently have miscalculated the degree of energy and promptitude necessary to overcome two such generals as Wellington and Blücher. He sadly underrated the gallant troops which he and his marshal had to combat. And when adverse writers talk so much of the calculating, cautious and methodical Wellington (as Napoleon was pleased to call him,) being taken by surprise in this campaign, we may venture to ask, was not the Emperor taken by surprise and thrown out in all his calculations by the extreme vigilance and energy which brought three corps of the Prussian army, above eighty-five thousand men, into position at Ligny by mid-day on the 16th? and but for an error in the transmission of orders, these troops would also have been joined by Bulow’s corps; and had general Zieten sent information to general Müffling or to the duke of Wellington at Brussels, when the French army in three columns was first seen in his front in advance of Charleroi, the whole allied army might have been concentrated at Quatre-Bras during the night of the 15th. Wellington in person was at Ligny on the 16th; observing Napoleon preparing for battle, and after conferring with Blücher, he returned to Quatre-Bras in time to give a most critical check to the gallant Ney. Was it no surprise to Napoleon to find that Wellington, upon hearing of Blücher’s retreat from Ligny, instead of falling back to Ostend, etc., immediately retired with ominous steadiness upon Mont-St.-Jean? and there arrested the ambition of his opponent, who, instead of being at Brussels early on the 17th, as intimated to Ney, was compelled to open his eyes, on the morning of the 18th, to the fact that he was still above twelve miles from Brussels, and unable to advance a step nearerwithout fighting a desperate battle, and staking his empire on the result! He did fight: the stake was lost, and, by the next morning, he found himself again at Charleroi, whence he had dispatched his memorable letter to his “cousin” Ney but two days before. He must have felt an agony ofsurpriseand something more, as he fled on for his very life, to escape from his enraged pursuers.

M. de Vaulabelle indeed, in his “Campaign and Battle of Waterloo,” published at Paris in 1845, attributes the non-arrival of Napoleon at Brussels, to his having calculated that the Prussians would not assemble in any great force until the 17th, (page 53;) and further on (page 54,) the author says, “Napoleon’s plans and arrangements were frustrated and his sanguine expectations disappointed, on finding a barrier of ninety-five thousand Prussians assembled between him and the Belgian capital.” The above author also informs us, (page 68,) that a longer delay on the 16th, in executing his projected movements at Ligny, would have compromised his success on that day; and (page 95,) that “on the 17th, fresh delays succeeded those of the two preceding ones.” Ney’s troops, although the marshal, it is pretended, received orders to renew the attack on Quatre-Bras at break of day, were still in bivac at eleven o’clock. We are given to understand by M. de Vaulabelle, that similar delays occurred to different corps placed under the direct command of the Emperor and marshal Grouchy. We are also told that “the soldiers grumbled at this inaction of which they did not know the motives, questioned their officers, and interrogated their generals;” in fact, to use the author’s words, “L’énergie et l’activité semblaient s’être réfugiées dans leurs rangs.” (“All energy and activity seemed to have taken refuge in their ranks.”) The inhabitants of St.-Amand also affirm that, on a group of generals passing through the village, the soldiers followed them with their cries, “We made our soup at break of day in order to be sooner at the ball, and we have been four hours doing nothing; why don’t we fight? There is something underhand[85].”

In face of all these discrepant statements, and upon calm reflection and close examination of the history of the battle of Waterloo, Napoleon’s disasters should not be attributed to the neglect or disobedience of his generals, but, under Providence, to the consummate bravery of the troops, and the skill of the generals opposed to him.

Napoleon, when at St.-Helena, admitted that the tactics of his army in the Waterloo campaign had their defects; but on no occasion, to my knowledge, did he admit that he himself had committed an error. He invariably endeavoured to shift all blame, more especially the irretrievable failure at Waterloo, to other shoulders than his own, to those of his marshals. He accused Grouchy, the well-tried soldier in many a hard-fought field, and who was banished for his attachment to the Imperial cause, of having, by neglect, delay and non-compliance with orders, occasioned his defeat at Waterloo; and Grouchy’s alleged false movement is the basis of every argument advanced by those who yet maintain the military infallibility of their idolized Emperor. One would imagine, from the tenor of Napoleon’s order of the day on the 14th of June, “Soldiers! we have forced marches to make, battles to fight, dangers to encounter,” that he would not have allowed the precious hours of the morning of the 16th to be frittered away in inactivity, or have left his troops until near eleven o’clock in the bivac of the night before, chiefly where they crossed the Sambre, viz. at Charleroi, Châtelet and Marchiennes, without making a movement to support his advanced troops at Frasnes and Fleurus. No doubt the French were fatigued and wanted rest; but, as the success of the campaign depended upon vigorously pressing forward, and making the most of the first advantages, there was no time for rest. Again, on the 17th, after the battles of Quatre-Bras and Ligny, we find Napoleon lingering on the field of Ligny, visiting the wounded, and expressing his satisfaction at witnessing the gallantry of his troops; we find him discussing, with Gérard and Grouchy, subjects in no way connected with the campaign which should decree him Emperor or exile; we find it to be near one o’clockP.M.(17th,) before he put his own force in motion to join Ney in pursuit of us, or before he gaveGrouchy his orders to pursue the Prussians. Early in the morning, Pajol’s cavalry and Teste’s infantry divisions were detached towards Namur, in pursuit of the Prussians; and, strange to say, when, after capturing a Prussian battery on the Namur road, and sending it to the Imperial head-quarters, they found themselves completely baffled and at fault, they returned to their bivac of the preceding night near Mazy, and lay there till next morning, the 18th.

The Prussians, after their line had been broken about nine o’clock on the 16th at Ligny, were allowed to retreat upon Wavre unmolested; nor did Grouchy, who was subsequently ordered by Napoleon “to follow the Prussians and not to let them out of his sight, to complete their defeat by attacking them and prevent their effecting a junction with the allies,” know until the afternoon of the 17th by what route the main Prussian army had retreated. Grouchy’s advance-guard did not come up with the Prussian rear till half-past tenA.M.of the 18th, when three out of the four Prussian corps were already on their march to join us: of this Grouchy knew nothing; so far from it, he believed he had the whole Prussian army before him.

If it be objected to Grouchy, that he did not act up to the letter or the spirit of his instructions, we affirm that it was impossible for him to do so, the delay in giving him his orders having enabled the Prussians to gain fourteen hours start of him.

This fact the marshal communicated to the Emperor, who replied that he, with the rest of his army, was about to follow the English and give them battle, should they take position in front of the forest of Soigne, directing Grouchy to communicate with him by the paved road of Quatre-Bras[86]: but not a word about that general’s joining in his attack on the English. Napoleon followed us by the paved road to La Belle-Alliance: Grouchy followed the Prussians by cross-roads to Gembloux, about six miles, where he halted for thenight, and wrote to Napoleon; receiving the following answer, dated

“Farm of Caillou, ten o’clockA.M.June 18th, 1815.“I am directed,” says the Adjutant-General (Soult,) “by the Emperor, to acquaint you that he is going to attack the English who are in line of battle in front of Waterloo, near the forest of Soigne. His Majesty directs you will move upon Wavre, to be nearer to us, to report your operations, to keep up a communication, etc.”

“Farm of Caillou, ten o’clockA.M.June 18th, 1815.

“I am directed,” says the Adjutant-General (Soult,) “by the Emperor, to acquaint you that he is going to attack the English who are in line of battle in front of Waterloo, near the forest of Soigne. His Majesty directs you will move upon Wavre, to be nearer to us, to report your operations, to keep up a communication, etc.”

Again, not one word about marching to assist the Emperor: and here we may observe that Wavre is not in the direction of Mont-St.-Jean. When, however, at one o’clock, Napoleon found that Wellington was not to be trifled with, and that a Prussian corps was hovering upon his right flank, he dispatched another order, dated

“Field of battle, Waterloo, one o’clockP.M.June 18th, 1815.“MONSIEUR LE MARÉCHAL,“You wrote from Gembloux this morning at two o’clock, informing the Emperor, you were about to march to Sart-lez-Walhain. His Majesty now directs you will manœuvre inourdirection; you must find out the point, in order to keep up the communication, and be at hand to fall upon and destroy any enemy that may attempt to attack our right. At this moment we are engaged in battle on the line of Waterloo, the enemy’s centre is Mont-St.-Jean; so manœuvre to join our right without loss of time.“The adjutant-general,Duke of Dalmatia.“P.S.—An intercepted letter informs us that the Prussian general Bulow is about to attack our right flank; we think we see the corps on the heights of St.-Lambert; so approach us without losing an instant, and destroy Bulow, should you catch him in the fact.”

“Field of battle, Waterloo, one o’clockP.M.June 18th, 1815.

“MONSIEUR LE MARÉCHAL,

“You wrote from Gembloux this morning at two o’clock, informing the Emperor, you were about to march to Sart-lez-Walhain. His Majesty now directs you will manœuvre inourdirection; you must find out the point, in order to keep up the communication, and be at hand to fall upon and destroy any enemy that may attempt to attack our right. At this moment we are engaged in battle on the line of Waterloo, the enemy’s centre is Mont-St.-Jean; so manœuvre to join our right without loss of time.

“The adjutant-general,Duke of Dalmatia.

“P.S.—An intercepted letter informs us that the Prussian general Bulow is about to attack our right flank; we think we see the corps on the heights of St.-Lambert; so approach us without losing an instant, and destroy Bulow, should you catch him in the fact.”

The order was in itself no doubt sound and judicious; but the original vice we have already alluded to, as characterizingthe movements of the French army after the passage of the Sambre, rendered obedience impossible. The letter, written at one o’clock, did not reach Grouchy until seven, about which time Napoleon’s right had been attacked and driven back by Bulow’s advanced brigades.

It was half-past seven o’clockA.M.on the 18th of June, when Grouchy moved from his bivac at Gembloux, and, owing to the bad state of the roads, nearly half-past eleven, before he reached Sart-lez-Walhain, a distance of about six miles. At the latter place, the report of a heavy cannonade was distinctly heard in the direction of Waterloo: Grouchy was strongly urged by some of his generals to march towards the firing; and for not doing so, he has been attacked at all points. He declined the proposition of his generals, on the ground that he did not consider it his duty to march towards the battle already raging elsewhere, but to attack, according to his instructions, the Prussians with whom he had just come up. Grouchy has since declared, that he did not consider it his duty to follow the advice of Gérard and the other generals, and that to have done so would have been acting contrary to his orders. To have detached a portion of his force towards the main French army would have separated his two corps by the Dyle river, whose waters were much swollen by the heavy rains, and whose banks were so swampy, that it would have been impossible for his divisions to have mutually supported each other; consequently he continued his march upon Wavre.

For argument’s sake, we will suppose that Grouchy adopts the advice of his generals, and commences his march at the time the firing was first heard, about half-past twelve o’clock. On average roads in fair condition, an army of thirty-two thousand men of all arms would take seven hours to march fifteen miles; they had already marched about six miles, as we have seen, over bad roads. From Sart-lez-Walhain to Plancenoit, Napoleon’s right, the distance is about sixteen miles, and over bad roads; how could they have come up in time, and that, without taking into account the obstructions which they must have encountered from the Prussian corps who were scouring the whole of that part of the country? It was utterlyimpossible for Grouchy, after breaking up his bivac at Gembloux so late as half-past seven o’clock on the morning of the 18th, to prevent the three Prussian corps, who well knew his movements, from forming a junction with us, or from attacking the French right. Had Grouchy left Gembloux at two o’clockA.M., and marched, unmolested by the Prussians, by St.-Guibert and Moustier to St.-Lambert, and taken position near the defiles of the Lasne and St.-Lambert, he might have kept Bulow from attacking the French right, and Napoleon might, before eight o’clock, about which time a brigade of Pirch’s and part of a brigade of Zieten’s corps came up, have attacked Wellington with his whole remaining force.

After the unaccountable delay on the 17th, the division of his force by Napoleon appears a false move; for a corps of cavalry would have sufficed to watch the Prussians. Grouchy, unquestionably, was dilatory, and wanting in his former energy and judgment; for though he must have known that the Prussians, or a large portion of them, would attempt their junction with us, he sent out no patrols to ascertain whether the contemplated movement was in operation, and neglected to keep up that which is always so essential, a close communication with the main body of the French army. His whole attention appears to have been directed to his right; the events on his left he entirely neglected.

We have stated Napoleon’s anxiety to impute the blame of the failure exclusively to his two marshals. We have endeavoured, in the fair and fearless spirit of military criticism, to examine how far such inculpation is borne out by facts in the case of marshal Grouchy, and we now, in the same impartial manner, propose to analyze the accusation made against the gallant and daring Ney, “the bravest of the brave.” The charges are twofold: delay at Quatre-Bras, and rashness at Waterloo.

Ney, as we have seen, had been ordered by Napoleon, on the morning of the 16th, to seize Quatre-Bras, to occupy Genappe if practicable, and to be ready to march on Brussels the same evening, (16th,) or on the morning of the 17th at latest, as the seizure of the capital by acoup de mainon the 17th was the Emperor’s grand object. For this purpose Neywas, if possible, to press forward three or four leagues at least, on the 16th, and to be supported by the light cavalry of the Imperial guard.

Now, Ney is blamed by Napoleon and other military writers (French,) for not having gained possession of Quatre-Bras early on the 16th, before our force came up. Certainly no British soldier underrates the value of an early attack: (as Aroyo-de-Molinos can testify:) but was Ney justified in attempting to obtain possession of Quatre-Bras? We incline to think he was not. More than one half of his force was still in the rear: D’Erlon’s corps was on the Sambre, or close to it, Girard’s division of Reille’s corps was near Fleurus with Grouchy, and Kellermann’s cavalry had not joined. No blame to him, the gallant Ney, forthat; he had joined the army but the evening before, (the 15th). Notwithstanding these untoward events, he ordered forward Reille’s (second) corps; but finding that heavy masses of the enemy were concentrating at St.-Amand on his right, and ignorant of the force in his front, he judiciously declined to press on till D’Erlon came up as a support.

Napoleon, before he left Charleroi, sent another order to Ney to unite his force, (Reille’s and D’Erlon’s corps, and Kellermann’s cuirassiers who were about to join him,) remarking, “With this force you ought to overwhelm any strength the enemy may oppose to you.” When Ney commenced his attack on Quatre-Bras he was cautious. Napoleon had now arrived at Fleurus, and sent word to Ney, that Grouchy would attack the Prussians at half-past two o’clock; that he, Ney, was to press vigorously upon any enemy in his front, and then turn round and assist in crushing the Prussians at Ligny. About three o’clock, Ney got another dispatch, informing him that the battle of Ligny had already begun, directing him to manœuvreimmediately, so as to fall upon the Prussian rear with all his force, which would be utterly destroyed if he acted with vigour, adding, in his own emphatic language addressed to a heart so susceptible and patriotic as Ney’s, “The fate of France is in your hands!” But that which pre-eminently characterized Napoleon’s early career, that to which he almost exclusively owed his brilliantvictories, that in which all men of all nations will admit his wonderful excellence,—rapidity in executing his plans,—here again failed him. Lightning may slumber; butTimewill ceaselessly march on, heedless of the errors of heroes! The Emperor’s delay enabled our noble Picton, with his gallant band, to come up from Brussels, closely followed by the Brunswickers, headed by their cherished and chivalrous duke, who found Quatre-Bras to be his last battle field. Such foes occupied Ney: and Napoleon knew it not!

Observe, Napoleon (who, according to French historians, could not err,) intrusting the fate of France to a flank movement by Ney, who was unable ultimately to hold his own position! He accuses Ney of having kept Reille’s and D’Erlon’s corps detached, saying, “Had he united them, not an Englishman would have escaped at Quatre-Bras;” and yet it was by Napoleon’sownorder, (in a pencilled note,) conveyed by colonel Laurent, that Ney was ordered to detach D’Erlon’s corps to St.-Amand! Laurent, falling in with the head of the column then marching on Frasnes, upon his own responsibility changed its direction. On inquiring for count D’Erlon, he was informed that, as was his habit, he had gone ahead to Frasnes, preceding his column. On his arrival at the latter place, Laurent found the general, and handed over to him the pencilled note, stating, at the same time, the position in which he might find the head of his column.

At this time general Delcambre, chief of the staff of the 1st (D’Erlon’s) corps, went to acquaint the prince de la Moskowa of the change in the line of march. Ney, who was himself then hard pressed by Wellington, sent back Delcambre with peremptory orders to D’Erlon to march on Quatre-Bras: butere the order could reachhim, he was close to St.-Amand, and consequently at too great a distance to return in time to render assistance to Ney.

Could Ney therefore be made responsible for the absence of D’Erlon’s corps, its change of direction, or this assumed want of vigour consequent on either?

It is evident from the tenor of the dispatch from Napoleon at two o’clock on the 16th, addressed to Ney at Gosselies, that Napoleon did not imagine that the marshal had left Gosseliesat that hour, much less that he had attacked us. Where now was Ney’s delay when, with afractionof his force, (three divisions of Reille’s corps and Piré’s cavalry,) he attacked us at Quatre-Bras?

This proves the fallacy of the assertions contained in theMémoires historiques de Napoléon, and something perhaps stronger than fallacies in Gourgaud’s campaign of 1815. In these Ney is assailed for not attacking usearlyin the morning of the 16th. We will not however leave the posthumous fame of the gallant Ney to be sacrificed to Imperial infallibility. We assert that Ney, on the 16th, did all at Quatre-Bras that circumstances warranted, and attempted more; we assert that if he failed in his attempt, (viz. of occupying Quatre-Bras,) his failure is to be, so far as Ney and his force are concerned, ascribed to British bayonets, and not to any want of skill, daring or rapidity on the part of Ney[87], or to any want of gallantry, or deadly devotion on the part of the brave troops of Reille, Piré and Kellermann.

We arrive now at the different versions which have been published of the battle of Waterloo, and which issued from St.-Helena. How much credit should be attached to these accounts, may be judged by the following extracts from the able work entitled “The Military life of the Duke of Wellington:”

“It may perhaps be remarked, that we have attached little authority to the accounts of this campaign which emanated from St.-Helena. The writer of this portion of the present work had the honour of being intimately acquainted with some of the persons composing Napoleon’s suite at Longwood; and although he has reason to believe the volumes given to the world with the names of generals de Montholon and Gourgaud perfixed to them to be genuine; that is, that they were preparedfrom Napoleon’s notes and dictation; yet, he conceives, he has equal reason for rejecting them as testimony. An officer of Bonaparte’s establishment told him at Longwood, that the termination of the battle of Waterloo had occasioned the utmost perplexity amongst them; and that he himself, having been employed by the ex-Emperor to write an account of the campaign, had presented no less thansixdistinct modes of ending the battle, all of which had been rejected.

“Ab uno disce omnes.”[88]

Various accounts of the battle that subsequently emanated from St.-Helena, Grouchy characterizes as containing “supposed instructions and orders, imaginary movements, etc., deductions made after the event;” (“des instructions et des ordres supposés, des mouvements imaginatifs, etc.;des assertions erronées, des hypothèses faites après coup.”) I will not trouble my readers with any further remarks upon accounts so destitute of truth. Gourgaud’s account, dictated by Napoleon himself, is, for the most part, indignantly and completely refuted by marshal Grouchy as a mere “military romance.”

From this trait of history-making, we may judge of the rest of the accounts that were concocted in the ever fertile imagination of Napoleon. His utter disregard of truth was part of his policy; and if, for a time, it enabled him to deceive a high-minded and gallant people, amongst whom the liberty of the press had been annihilated, in the end it contributed to his ruin, nearly as much as did the bravery and perseverance of his victorious opponents. Why did we meet him at Waterloo? We were not at war with France, with its legitimate sovereign, or with the French people. But we were at war with Napoleon: he had been declaredhors la loi(outlawed) by civilized Europe[89]; the idol indeed of a fine army, but a man devoid of truth and principle, whom no treaties could bind, and whose restless ambition was utterly incompatible with the peace of Europe.

His chief aim was to obtain universal dominion, and his inordinate love of glory made him conceive the chimera of a universal monarchy, of which he was to be the chief. Few have denied him to have been an able and daring commander, gifted with great military talents; and the duke of Wellington never hesitated in affirming, that of all the chiefs of armies in the world, the one in whose presence it was most hazardous to make a false movement was Napoleon[90].

(Napoleon)

“The triumph and the vanity,The rapture of the strife,The earthquake voice of victory,To him the breath of life;The sword, the sceptre and the sway,That men seem’d born but to obey.”

“The triumph and the vanity,

The rapture of the strife,

The earthquake voice of victory,

To him the breath of life;

The sword, the sceptre and the sway,

That men seem’d born but to obey.”

It was against this man, and not against France, that Wellington uniformly declared he was leading his troops: “France,” said the Duke in a letter dated June 4th, 1815, “has no enemies, as far as I know: I am sure that she doesnot deserve to have any. We are the enemies of one man only, and of his partisans, of him who has misused his influence over the French army, to overthrow the throne of the king, in order to subjugate France, and then to bring back to all of us the days of misery which we thought were gone by.... Our state then ought not to be called one of war with France, but of war on the part of all Europe, comprising therein France herself, against Napoleon and against his army, whose bad conduct is the cause of all the evils which are going to happen, and which we all deplore[91].”

Lest our neighbours may think this view of Napoleon’s character drawn by English prejudice, and as not affording sufficient reasons for the determination of Wellington to aim solely at his destruction, and with a steadiness of resolve not to be turned aside till complete success attended the efforts of the allies, I beg to record the following character of Napoleon, and his iron rule over the French people. It will be observed that this character was drawn by the pen of Frenchmen, proclaimed by French authorities, and placarded by them on all the walls of Paris, whose inhabitants knew too well the facts on which the proclamation was founded. The general and municipal Council of Paris thus addressed the people, the year before the battle of Waterloo:

“You owe all the evils which overwhelm you to one man, to him who every year, by the conscription, decimates your families. Who amongst us has not lost a brother, a son, relatives, friends? And why have all these brave men fallen? For him alone, and not for the country. In what cause have they fallen? They have been immolated to the mad ambition of leaving behind him the name of the most dreadful oppressor that ever weighed on the human race.... It is he that has closed against us the seas of the two worlds. To him we are indebted for the hatred of the people of all nations, without having deserved it; for, like them, we have been the unhappy victims as well as the sad instruments of his madness. What matters it that he has sacrificed but few to his private hatred, if he has sacrificed France,—we should not say, France only,but all Europe, to his boundless ambition? Look at the vast continent of Europe, everywhere strewed with the mingled bones of Frenchmen, and people with whom we had no disputes, no causes of mutual hatred, who were too distant from us to have any cause of quarrel, but whom he precipitated into all the horrors of war, solely that the earth might be filled with the noise of his name. Why boast of his past victories? What good have those dreadful triumphs brought us? The hatred of other nations, the tears of our families, our daughters forced to remain unmarried, our matrons plunged into premature widowhood, the despair of fathers and mothers, to whom there remains, out of a numerous progeny, but the hand of an infant to close their eyes: behold! these are the results of all those victories, which have brought foreign armies within our very walls.... In the name of our most sacred duties, we abjure all obedience to the usurper; we return to our legitimate rulers.”

“How just,” adds a French historian, “are these accusations, although they were made by men who a little before had been prodigal of flattery and incense to the author of all these public calamities[92]!”

With such a man as Napoleon is here described, whose towering military genius no one can call in question, and whose influence had so long, and so fatally fascinated the gallant French people, whose eyes were at length opened to the real character of his rule, it must not be wondered at, that we went to war; nor should our triumph over him ever be regarded as a triumph over the French nation: between that high-minded people and the rest of the civilized world, may the peace, which is already of unexampled duration, and which we bought so dearly, continue forever!

I may here present to the reader the sentiments of a noble and distinguished writer, who had long been near Napoleon and had closely watched his career. On hearing of his arrival at St.-Helena, this French statesman and scholar gave the following commentary to the world. No one who is acquainted with the writings of Chateaubriand will suspect him of anybias towards the British character: yet he wrote thus of our vanquished foe:

“The bloody drama of Europe is concluded, and the great tragedian, who for twenty years has made the earth his theatre, and set the world in tears, has left the stage for ever! He lifted the curtain with his sword, and filled the scenes with slaughter. His part was invented by himself, and was terribly unique. Never was there so ambitious, so restless a spirit; never so daring, so fortunate a soldier. His aim was universal dominion, and he gazed at it steadfastly with the eye of the eagle, and the appetite of the vulture.

“He combined within himself all the elements of terror, nerve, malice and intellect; a heart that never trembled, a mind that never wavered from its purpose. The greatness of his plans defied speculation, and the rapidity of their execution outstripped prophecy. Civilized nations were the victims of his arts, and savages could not withstand his warfare. Sceptres crumbled in his grasp, and liberty withered in his presence. The Almighty appeared to have intrusted to him the destinies of the globe, and he used them to destroy. He shrouded the sun with the clouds of battle, and unveiled the night with his fires. His march reversed the course of nature: the flowers of the spring perished, the fruits of autumn fell; for his track was cold, and cheerless, and desolate, like the withering, wintry blast. Amid all the physical, moral and political changes which he produced, he was still the same. Always ambitious, always inexorable; no compassion assuaged, no remorse deterred, no dangers alarmed him. Like the barbarians, he conquered Italy, and rolling back to its source the deluge that overwhelmed Rome, he proved himself the Attila of the West. With Hannibal, he crossed the Alps in triumph; Africa beheld in him a second Scipio, and standing on the Pyramids of Egypt, he looked down on the fame of Alexander. He fought the Scythian in his cave, and the unconquered Arab fled before him. He won, and divided, and ruled nearly all modern Europe. It became a large French province, where foreign kings still reigned by courtesy, or mourned in chains. The Roman pontiff was his prisoner, and he claimed dominion over the altar with the God of hosts. Even his name inspireduniversal terror, and the obscurity of his designs rendered him awfully mysterious. The navy of Great Britain watched him with the eye of Argus, and her coast was lined with soldiers who slept on their arms. He made war before he declared it; and peace was with him a signal for hostilities. His friends were the first whom he assailed, and his allies he selected to plunder. There was a singular opposition between his alleged motives and his conduct. He would have enslaved the land to make the ocean free, and he wanted only power to enslave both.

“If he was arrogant, his unparalleled successes must excuse him. Who could endure the giddiness of such a mountain elevation? Who, that amid the slaughter of millions had escaped unhurt, would not suppose, that a deity had lent him armour, like Achilles? Who, that had risen from such obscurity, overcame such mighty obstacles, vanquished so many monarchs, won such extensive empires, and enjoyed so absolute a sway? Who, in the fulness of unequalled power and in the pride of exulting ambition, would not believe himself the favourite of Heaven?

“He received the tribute of fear, and love, and admiration. The weight of the chains which he imposed on France was forgotten in their splendour: it was glorious to follow him, even as a conscript. The arts became servile in his praise; and genius divided with him her immortal honours. For it is mind alone that can triumph over time. Letters, only, yield permanent renown.

“This blood-stained soldier adorned his throne with the trophies of art, and made Paris the seat of taste as well as of power. There, the old and the new world met and conversed; there, Time was seen robbed of his scythe, lingering among beauties which he could not destroy; there, the heroes and sages of every age mingled in splendid alliance, and joined in the march of fame. They will appeal to posterity to mitigate the sentence which humanity claims against the tyrant Bonaparte. Awful indeed will be that sentence; but when will posterity be a disinterested tribunal? When will the time arrive that Europe shall have put off mourning for his crimes? In what distant recess of futurity will the memory of Moskowsleep? When will Jena, Gerona, and Austerlitz, when will Jaffa, Corunna, and Waterloo be named without tears of anguish and vows of retribution? Earth can never forget, man can never forgive them.

“Let him live, if he can endure life, divested of his crown, without an army, and almost without a follower. Let him live, he who never spared his friends, if he can withstand the humiliation of owing his life to an enemy. Let him live, and listen to the voice of conscience. He can no longer drown it in the clamorous report of war. No cuirass guards his bosom from the arrows of remorse. Now that the cares of state have ceased to distract his thoughts, let him reflect on his miserable self; and, with the map before him, retrace his bloody career. Alas! his life is a picture of ruin, and the light that displays it is the funeral torch of nations. It exhibits one mighty sepulchre, crowded with the mangled victims of murderous ambition. Let him reflect on his enormous abuse of power, on his violated faith, and shameless disregard of all law and justice.

“Let him live, and repent; let him seek to atone in humility and solitude for the sins of his political life, an example of the catastrophe of the wicked, and the vanity of false greatness. Great he unquestionably was, great in the resources of a misguided spirit, great in the conception and execution of evil; great in mischief, like the pestilence; great in desolation, like the whirlwind.”

From the equivocal loyalty to the common cause of many of the troops in the allied army, and the severity of the contest, we were not so surprised as we were vexed, to see them skulk away, and make for Brussels, or seek shelter in the woods. Our numbers were greatly reduced by this sort of defection, long before the close of the battle. General Müffling estimates the runaways at ten thousand, (far below the real number). Of course, such heroes would invent narratives and retail them in their dishonourable flight, in order to cover themselves from the reproaches and contempt richly merited by such unsoldierly behaviour. A gallant officer records a fact in point:

“Having been sent before day-light, on the morning after the battle,” says lieutenant-colonel Basil Jackson, “to communicatethe Duke’s orders for his array to move on Nivelles, ... I had an opportunity of witnessing how disgraceful had been the conduct of many of the foreign troops. I saw thousands making their way to the front, who had quitted their colours during the battle and fled to the forest. The commanding officer of a cavalry regiment showed me a hundred and forty men, stating that his loss in the battle had reduced it to that number. I believe this regiment was not engaged; for very nearly the original complement of eight hundred men were forthcoming a few days after! The Duke degraded it, by turning it over to the commissariat to furnish escorts[93].”

Some there were who wore the British uniform, who took advantage of the duty of carrying the wounded to the rear, and did not return to their duty on the field. This circumstance has been pitiably exaggerated, and even distorted into a tale that the British generally were flying off to Brussels when the Prussians came up.

The duke of Wellington, in his general order, issued at Nivelles, two days after the battle, thus noticed the conduct of those who had improperly absented themselves from their colours:

... “3. The Field-Marshal has observed that several soldiers, and even officers, have quitted their ranks without leave, and have gone to Brussels, and even some to Antwerp; where, and in the country through which they have passed, they have spread a false alarm, in a manner highly unmilitary, and derogatory to the character of soldiers.

“4. The Field-Marshal requests the general officers commanding divisions in the British army, and the general officers commanding the corps of each nation of which the army is composed, to report to him in writing what officers and men,—the former by name,—are now, or have been, absent without leave since the 16th[94].”

It may not be out of place to offer a few general remarks on some points in which the public have felt much interest, and upon which opinions have greatly differed.

It is certain that the duke of Wellington would not have accepted battle at Waterloo, had he not been sure of the cooperation of the Prussians; and the loss which they sustained during the short time they were engaged, proves the value of that cooperation.

The diversion of the Prussians diminished the French force against us, by count de Lobau’s corps, eleven battalions of the Imperial guard, and eighteen squadrons of cavalry, amounting to above fifteen thousand men and sixty-six guns. It is evident that the blow, which decided the fate of the day, was given by the Duke when he defeated the Imperial guard, attacked the French reserves, and forced their centre: by this, D’Erlon’s columns were turned on their left, and Reille’s on their right: then followed the general advance of Wellington’s whole line.

With the splendid light cavalry force Napoleon had at his command, and Grouchy, detached with thirty-two thousand men of all arms to watch the Prussians, it is most extraordinary that the first intimation the Emperor had of their advance upon his right, was about one o’clock on the 18th, when, from his position above La Belle-Alliance, he himself saw them at St.-Lambert.

Notwithstanding the numerous charges made by the French cavalry, not one was made upon our left wing; nor was their cavalry of the right wing put in motion, till the ardour of our heavy cavalry carried them upon the French position, when their lancers, cuirassiers and dragoons were let loose upon our broken and disordered cavalry, who suffered severely.

D’Erlon’s infantry columns, and the last two attacking columns of the Imperial guard were entirely unsupported by cavalry, or they never could have been so closely pursued, and so roughly handled.

The French army under Napoleon was composed almost exclusively of veterans; many of whom, the year before, had been liberated from the English, Russian and Austrian prisons: men whose trade was war, and who were well inured to it; whose battles equalled their years in number; all of one nation, devoted to their leader and his cause, most enthusiastic,and well equipped: in fact the finest army Napoleon ever brought into the field. One more gallant, or more complete in every respect, never stood before us.

We, on the contrary, were of different nations. Our foreign auxiliaries, who constituted more than half our numerical strength, with some exceptions, were little better that raw militia-men.

It would not perhaps be out of place if we now notice an assertion of French, and even of English writers; namely, that the duke of Wellington was taken by surprise at the commencement of this campaign. Surely the French must laugh in their sleeves when they find English writers credulous enough to print statements which have originated in the lively imaginations of our neighbours, and to support the assertion that the Duke depended upon such a man as Fouché, for information of Napoleon’s arrival in Belgium, and of his plan of operations. We find a very late writer even quoting Fouché, to prove what he advances. One would imagine that such authors were perfectly ignorant of the contents of the Duke’s twelfth volume of the Dispatches, or of Fouché’s reputation. They deny his Grace the possession of common prudence, if they believe he would intrust the safety of his army, and thereby the interests of Europe, to an ignoble police-spy, whose memory is justly despised by every Frenchman.

In reply to the unfounded statement that Wellington relied on any information from that archtraitor and lump of duplicity, it is sufficient to give the following extract from a letter in the Duke’s Dispatches, (vol. XII, page 649,) addressed to Dumouriez: “Avant mon arrivée à Paris, au mois de juillet, je n’avais jamais vu Fouché, ni eu avec lui communication quelconque, ni avec aucun de ceux qui sont liés avec lui.” (“Before my arrival in Paris, in July, I had never seen Fouché, nor had had any communication with him, nor with any one connected with him.”) Of the French movements the Duke had timely information from a very different source. I was told by sir Hussey Vivian, (when he visited the field in 1839,) that he was aware on the 13th of June; of the French being concentrated and ready to attack; and that hereported the circumstance to the Duke: this is corroborated in Siborne’s history, at page 49, vol. I: these are undoubted authorities.

Those who have attentively followed the Duke in his operations during this campaign, or referred to his correspondence, will have found that, for weeks before, his Grace had foreseen Napoleon’s intentions and had made deliberate arrangements to render them unavailing. The allied army was so cantoned by Wellington, that its divisions could be promptly united when the plans of Napoleon should be sufficiently developed. The admirable organization of the allied army, effected by the Duke so shortly after he took the command, must have struck our readers: it is evident he was at once the main-spring, directing head, and very soul of the grand European coalition; and it could only be a just confidence in the admirable plan he had drawn up for the conduct of the allied troops, that dictated the letter addressed to sir Henry Wellesley, June 2d, 1815, and which expresses the following very remarkable anticipation of coming events:

... “We have as yet done nothing here.... Towards the 16th, I hope we shall begin. I shall enter France with between seventy and eighty thousand men; the Prussians near me, with twice as many[95].”

This document was penned a fortnight before the action at Quatre-Bras, where we began work in earnest, as the Duke had anticipated, exactly on the 16th. This fact, of itself, should suffice to stop the mouths of those who delight in telling us that Wellington was taken by surprise. There were moments indeed, when he thought that Napoleon’s ambition might be so far controlled by common prudence, as to be content with remaining within the boundaries of France, and leaving the odium of acting aggressively to the allied powers; and in such moments, the Duke spoke and wrote of awaiting for the combined movements of the Austrians and Russians. But not for a single instant did he lose sight of the possibility, nay probability, that Bonaparte would rush across the borders, begin offensive operations, and make a dash to seize theperson of Louis XVIII, or to get possession of the city of Brussels. Against these contingencies, how early and how ably our great chieftain provided, let facts, and not the dreams of mortified narrators, inform the world.

On the 6th, 7th, and 10th of June, the Duke dispatched letters to the Prussians’ head-quarters], informing them that the enemy was in great strength about Maubeuge, where Bonaparte was said to be on the 9th, and thence to have gone along the frontiers towards Lille; and that an attack was to be forthwith expected[96].

With this intelligence received by Wellington, and actively circulated by him among all who were exposed to be attacked by the French, how was it possible that he should be taken bysurprise? Every movement of the enemy was quickly known to him; and his characteristic vigilance, and matured judgment, enabled him to foretell the very time and place of the grand attack. All that depended on him was in perfect readiness, several days before fighting began. If the Prussians were unaccountably remiss in not forwarding to his Grace earlier intelligence of the descent of the enemy into Belgium, it was not for want of watchfulness on the part of the Duke;hewas quite awake. Let the reader turn to the Appendix of this work, (No. I,) for proof that Wellington was not easily to be surprised, but that he had all his forces so well in hand on the 30th of April, that they could march at a moment’s notice, and unite at any point really attacked.

In reply to the assertion made by French, and even by Prussian official writers, “that Blücher and his troops saved the allied army,” it may be observed, the battle of Waterloo must be always considered as a battle fought by the right wing of an army, for the purpose of maintaining a position until the arrival of the Prussians, its left wing, should render victory certain. The safest tactics, in the Duke’s opinion, were to act entirely on the defensive, and he had, in consequence, thoroughly matured his arrangements with Blücher for mutual support. The Duke, therefore, was not only justified in receiving battle, but had every reason to expect tohave been reinforced several hours before the Prussians came up. Waterloo might have terminated with much less sacrifice of life, and as decisively at three, as it afterwards did at eight o’clock. But even admitting, for a moment, that the arrival of the Prussians saved us at Waterloo, we undoubtedly saved them by holding our position until they came up. Had we given way before they cleared the defiles of St.-Lambert, they would have been annihilated; of this they were aware, as our readers will be convinced on reference to the letters from the Prussian to the allied head-quarters[97].

But facts are stubborn things, and it is doubtful whether Napoleon could have driven the British from the ground, even if the Prussians had not arrived. The English troops had maintained their position for eight hours against the most experienced army and the ablest general ever France sent into the field; not a British regiment was broken, nor the allied army in a panic, nor, at any time, in serious danger of being penetrated. Further, even if the Prussians had not arrived, we are inclined to think that Napoleon could not, in the exhausted and dispirited condition of his troops, and the lateness of the hour, have driven the British from their ground. His cavalry was nearly annihilated: while three brigades of British infantry, one of the King’s German legion, and two brigades of British cavalry[98], had, except in the loss sustained by the 27th regiment, and 12th dragoons, suffered but comparatively little; many of the foreign troops had not fired a shot: and after the arrival of Vivian and Vandeleur, theBritish cavalrywere, as our readers have seen, masters of the field. The junction of the Prussians was a part of Wellington’s combinations for the battle. Their flank movement at Waterloo was similar to Desaix’s from Novi to Marengo; with this no small difference, that upon Bulow’s troops joining, they found the allied army firm and unbroken, and rather inadvance of their position of the morning[99]: when Desaix joined Bonaparte, he was in full retreat, one wing of his army destroyed, and obliged to change his whole front to save the rest from destruction; this eventually gave him the victory. We are not astonished that the French should employ this argument as a balm to their disappointment, but it comes with a peculiar bad grace from the Prussians. Surely, in thus taking the lion’s share in this glorious victory, they do not think to cover their defeat at Ligny, or their unaccountable delay in arriving on the field of Waterloo.

“The roads were very bad, and the Prussians had a numerous artillery, not over-well horsed. Yet supposing them to have been put in motion at eight o’clock in the morning, (their official account saysbreak of day,) they were ten or eleven hours in marching little more than a like number of miles! May we not therefore be allowed to conjecture, that there was some hesitation on the part of Blücher in marching upon Waterloo, until he could feel assured of his army being in little danger from Grouchy?” (JacksosandScott’sLife of the Duke of Wellington.)[100].

And if true, as the Prussian official report represents, that Blücher had such a large force on the field to act, previous to, or during Napoleon’s last attack upon us, why did not Blücher, to use the language of two excellent military writers, roll up the French army as Pakenham’s division did at Salamanca? I have often thought that if lord Hill could, by any means, have been transferred across the field to where Bulow debouched, with the same force of British troops under his command as Bulow had of Prussian, (30,000,) our illustrious Chief’s table that night might have been honoured by the presence of Napoleon and his chief officers, and most of the French army favoured with a free passage to England.

Lieutenant-colonel B. Jackson, in hisMilitary life of Wellington, (vol. II, page 806,) says, “There can exist no doubtwhatever that, paradoxical as it may at first sight appear, the cooperation, thought somewhat tardy, of the Prussians, produced,not the defeat, but the total rout of Bonaparte’s army: for the duke of Wellington could not, weakened as his force was at the close of the day, have hazarded an attack with his whole army, had Blücher not been at hand to support the movement. The service rendered by our brave allies was therefore most opportune, and of the highest value.... An error of half an hour—and men do not consult their watches during the excitement of battle—made either by the Prussians or ourselves, is sufficient to account for much of the discrepance existing between their statements and our own.”

That English and Prussian writers should altogether agree as to the apportionment of the glory of the day, was not to be expected. It is clear, to the lasting honour of the two allied nations, that whatever feelings may have since grown up on this subject, none interfered at the time with the cordiality of their combined operations. The following lines, from a Prussian pen, will show that just national pride is not inconsistent with candour:

“Upon the question, who really fought and won the battle of the 18th, no discussion, much less contention, ought to have arisen. Without in the slightest degree impeaching the just share of Prussia in the victory, or losing sight for a moment of the fact that she bore a great share of the danger, and drew much of it from her allies and upon herself at a decisive moment, no unprejudiced person can conceal from himself that the honour of the day is due to the Anglo-Netherlandish army, and to the measures of its great leader. The struggle of Mont-St.-Jean was conducted with an obstinacy, ability, and foresight of which history affords few examples. The great loss of the English also speaks the merit of their services. More than seven hundred officers, among them the first of their army, whether in rank or merit, and upwards of ten thousand soldiers, fell, or retired wounded from the field[101].”

No one unacquainted with war can form the most distant idea of the weak state and disorganization to which even a victorious army is reduced by a long, trying, severe day’s battle. The number of men absent from the ranks is incredible, and long continued excitement nearly exhausts the rest.

Although we place little reliance on statements which have originated from St.-Helena, yet we must be excused if we quote O’Meara, whose conversations with the Emperor have been faithfully given to the world. They contain several allusions to the battle of Waterloo, and attest the Emperor’s conviction of the completeness of our victory over him, and the hopelessness of all his plans, as well as his utter despair before he quitted the field.

What other honest interpretation can be given to these words, “I ought to have died at Waterloo; but, as ill luck will have it, when you seek death you cannot meet with it. There were numbers killed close to me, before, behind, on every side of me; but there was no bullet for me!” Why should a man desire to be struck down, if, as the fond tale goes amongst some of his indiscriminate admirers, he had thrice won the battle of Waterloo? He desired death, because he saw that all his resources were gone, and that the British, notwithstanding the day’s dreadful carnage, were about to deal the decisive blow with irresistible force.

The same author relates several facts connected with the battle of Waterloo, communicated to him by general Gourgaud, under Napoleon’s roof. These are the general’s words, as written down at the time, (August 23d, 1817:)

“At the close of the battle of Waterloo, and after the unsuccessful charge of the French, the English cavalry which charged in return, approached within two or three hundred yards of the spot where Napoleon was, with none about him but Soult, Drouot, Bertrand, and Gourgaud himself. At a short distance from them was a small French battalion, that had formed square. Napoleon directed general Gourgaud to order two or three field-pieces belonging to this battalion to be fired, in order to arrest the cavalry which was coming on. The order was executed, and one of the balls wounded lord Uxbridge in the leg. Napoleon put himself at the head ofthe column, exclaiming, ‘Here we must die! we must die on the field of battle!’”

Let us observe, that Napoleon must, at this moment, have felt himself beaten, and that his conquerors were the British, to whom, as the most noble of his enemies, he paid the compliment, wishing to die by our hands rather than by those of the Prussians, who were advancing on his right, ready enough to gratify his wish. But, to continue general Gourgaud’s account:

“At the very instant that Napoleon was desirous of making a charge with the handful of men left about him, the English light infantry was gaining ground. Labédoyère galloped round them, sword in hand, seeming to court a glorious death on the field of honour. We prevented Napoleon from rushing into the midst of the enemy. It was Soult who seized his horse by the bridle, and said, ‘They will not kill you: you will be taken prisoner;’ and that general, with the assistance of a few others who gathered round, prevailed on Napoleon to fly from the field of battle.”

We have often, throughout this discussion, quoted several of our opponents: let us now give two great authorities on every question connected with the field of Waterloo, viz. the duke of Wellington and lord Hill. It is also a conversation, but related by B. R. Haydon Esq., (United Service Magazine, February 1844, page 281:)

“When sir Walter Scott was at Paris in 1815, he was permitted to ask, and he did put the following questions, at his Grace’s table, relating to Waterloo, and I repeat them as sir Walter detailed them to me at my own: ‘Suppose, your Grace, Blücher had not come up.’ The Duke replied, ‘I could have kept my ground till next morning.’—‘Suppose Grouchy had come first.’—‘Blücher would have been close behind him.’—‘But let us suppose, your Grace had been compelled to retreat.’—‘I could have taken position in the forest of Soigne, and defied all till the allies joined.’—‘Was there any part of the day when your Grace despaired?’—‘Never,’ was the reply.

“This was the reply of the first in command. In 1833, the writer of this letter dined at lord Palmerston’s; on his rightsat lord Hill. As his Lordship lived near the author, he offered to set him down. When alone in the carriage with lord Hill, remembering what sir Walter had affirmed of the Duke’s confidence, he said, ‘Was there any part of the day at Waterloo, my lord, you ever desponded as to the result?’—‘Desponded!’ replied lord Hill, ‘never: there never was the least panic; we had gained rather than lost ground, by the evening. No, there was not a moment I had the least doubt of the result.’”

In conclusion, and as a final answer to the depreciators of British valour, we offer them the speech of the celebrated Ney, uttered in the Chamber of Peers four days after the battle, and which is, perhaps, of the French accounts the most worthy of attention, and too remarkable to be omitted on the present occasion.

When the peers were assembled, Carnot gave them a flaming account of Grouchy’s admirable retreat from Wavre, at the head, the minister said, of sixty thousand men; of Soult’s success in collecting together twenty thousand of the old guard; of new levies from the interior, with two hundred pieces of cannon. Ney, highly incensed at these mischievous untruths, and keenly suffering from the injustice done to him in Napoleon’s bulletins, started up, and declared Carnot’s statement to be utterly false:

“Will they dare to assert,” exclaimed the exasperated marshal, “before eyewitnesses of the disastrous day of the 18th, that we have yet sixty thousand soldiers embodied? Grouchy cannot have under him above twenty or five-and-twenty thousand soldiers, at the utmost. Had he possessed a greater force, he might have covered the retreat, and the Emperor would still have been in command of an army on the frontiers. Not a man of the guard will ever rally more. I myself commanded them; I myself witnessed their total extermination, ere I left the field of battle: they are annihilated. The enemy are at Nivelles with eighty thousand men; they may, if they please, be at Paris in six days. There is no safety for France, but in instant propositions for peace[102].”

This speech opened the eyes of all Paris to the facts, and prepared the entry of the allies into France, almost without striking a blow. It was truly, like my pages,a voice from Waterlooand is the last testimony we shall present to the reader, in refutation of the tale, that we were beaten before the arrival of the Prussians. It was not against the latter that the devoted Ney led the Imperial guard, nor were they by the Prussians annihilated; they were defeated on no other spot but the allied position on the field of Waterloo.

Back to Index Next