APPENDIX.
[Although the annexed letter does not come chronologically within the scope of Mr. Larpent’s Journal, as there is an anticipatory notice, towards the close of the second volume, of Sir John Murray’s trial, it may not inappropriately be inserted here.]
Paris, January 19th, 1815.My dear Sir,Inregard to Sir John Murray’s trial, I intended to prove the charges framed by my directions against him, in consequence of the orders of Government, by the production of my Instructions and his Reports, all of which are in the Government Offices.Sir John Murray contends that one paragraph of my Instructions directed him not to risk an action. I think he has mistaken my meaning in that paragraph; but whether he has or not, that paragraph did not recall the other Instructions for his conduct.The object of that paragraph was to prevent the Spanish Generals Elio and the Duque del Parque, from taking advantage of Sir JohnMurray’s absence, and the temporary command which they had of the cavalry belonging to Sir John Murray’s and Whittingham’s corps, to attack the French. There existed a prevailing opinion among the Spanish officers that their failures were to be attributed to the want of good cavalry; and this paragraph of the Instructions was drawn with the view of preventing those officers from attempting to fight a general action when circumstances should have placed a small body of good cavalry at their disposal, more particularly as all the manœuvres ordered by the Instructions had in view to prevent the necessity of a general action.I have not by me the Instructions, but, as well as I recollect, this meaning of the paragraph is obvious; and it will be particularly observed that it comes in after the directions for the formation of the Corps Romain in Bohemia with the Duque del Parque and General Elio. I think, as I before stated, that this paragraph has nothing to say to the question of Sir John Murray’s guilt or innocence of the two charges, though it has to that brought against him by the Admiral.The Court has, of course, a right to judge of my meaning by the words in which it is conveyed, in whatever manner I may now explain it or you may explain it for me, as the obvious meaning of those words was to be the guide of Sir John Murray’s conduct. I must add also, that whatever care I may have taken, it is not improbable that in drawing an Instruction for the operations of so many corps, all with separate Commanders-in-Chief, I may not in every instance have made use of the language which should convey the meaning I had in my mind.There is nothing else that occurs to me; but I shall be glad to hear from you occasionally during the trial, and receive a copy of the evidence when it can be got.Believe me,Ever yours, most faithfully,Wellington.To F. S. Larpent, Esq.&c.&c.
Paris, January 19th, 1815.
My dear Sir,
Inregard to Sir John Murray’s trial, I intended to prove the charges framed by my directions against him, in consequence of the orders of Government, by the production of my Instructions and his Reports, all of which are in the Government Offices.
Sir John Murray contends that one paragraph of my Instructions directed him not to risk an action. I think he has mistaken my meaning in that paragraph; but whether he has or not, that paragraph did not recall the other Instructions for his conduct.
The object of that paragraph was to prevent the Spanish Generals Elio and the Duque del Parque, from taking advantage of Sir JohnMurray’s absence, and the temporary command which they had of the cavalry belonging to Sir John Murray’s and Whittingham’s corps, to attack the French. There existed a prevailing opinion among the Spanish officers that their failures were to be attributed to the want of good cavalry; and this paragraph of the Instructions was drawn with the view of preventing those officers from attempting to fight a general action when circumstances should have placed a small body of good cavalry at their disposal, more particularly as all the manœuvres ordered by the Instructions had in view to prevent the necessity of a general action.
I have not by me the Instructions, but, as well as I recollect, this meaning of the paragraph is obvious; and it will be particularly observed that it comes in after the directions for the formation of the Corps Romain in Bohemia with the Duque del Parque and General Elio. I think, as I before stated, that this paragraph has nothing to say to the question of Sir John Murray’s guilt or innocence of the two charges, though it has to that brought against him by the Admiral.
The Court has, of course, a right to judge of my meaning by the words in which it is conveyed, in whatever manner I may now explain it or you may explain it for me, as the obvious meaning of those words was to be the guide of Sir John Murray’s conduct. I must add also, that whatever care I may have taken, it is not improbable that in drawing an Instruction for the operations of so many corps, all with separate Commanders-in-Chief, I may not in every instance have made use of the language which should convey the meaning I had in my mind.
There is nothing else that occurs to me; but I shall be glad to hear from you occasionally during the trial, and receive a copy of the evidence when it can be got.
Believe me,Ever yours, most faithfully,Wellington.
To F. S. Larpent, Esq.&c.&c.
LONDON: W. CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.