well defended by the forces he left there for that purpose, that the Duke of Berwick’s army was twice repulsed with considerable loss. Catalonia was thus saved. The “Annals” testify that “the preservation of that province was in a great measure due to the vigilance and activity of the Earl of Galway, who put the places most exposed in a good posture of defence.” The same authority records Lord Galway’s “indefatigable industry and application” in providing subsistence for the troops, and in forming regiments of Catalans. Lord Galway, being so fiercely criticised at every opportunity, could not help praising himself on this occasion. He says, “With great expedition I gathered the broken remains of the foot (out of which I formed five battalions) and raised four more of Catalans, with which we made a stand against a victorious enemy, and preserved the principality of Catalonia entire (except Lerida).” Stanhope wrote to Marlborough from Barcelona, 6th June 1707:—
“My Lord Galway is raising some Spanish regiments of foot, and does indeed use all application possible to prevent their [the French and Philip] reaping those advantages from the battle which they might have done had they followed their victory instead of amusing themselves as they have done. I wish I could do the same justice to the court.”[1]
The French were mainly employed at home in defending Toulon, and the Duke of Berwick’s services were demanded there. In Catalonia the only French operation was to besiege Lerida, which was resolutely defended by the Prince of Hesse-Darmstadt, Lord Galway constantly harassing and alarming the besiegers. Philip of Anjou had given a grant of Lerida and its environs to Berwick as a reward for the victory of Almanza, and the siege was conducted with more earnestness, when the ducal grantee returned from Toulon. The writer in the “Biographie Universelle” says: “Galway having recruited the remnants of his army applied himself to repair the disaster of Almanza with incredible activity. He proposed to the ministers of Charles III. to withdraw from the garrisons all the disposable troops to form an army capable of resisting the Duke of Orleans. His counsel was not followed. The loss of Lerida was the result of that error.” Burnet says, “When the besieged saw how long they could hold out, they gave the Earl of Galway notice, upon which he intended to have raised the siege. And if the King of Spain would have consented to his drawing out of the other garrisons such a force as might have been spared, he undertook to raise it, which was believed might have been easily done; and if he had succeeded, it would have given a new turn to all our affairs in Spain. But Count Noyelles, who was well practised in the arts of flattery, and knew how much King Charles was alienated from the Earl of Galway for the honest freedom he had used with him in laying before him some errors in his conduct, set himself to oppose this, apprehending that success in it would have raised the Earl of Galway’s reputation again, which had suffered a great diminution by the action of Almanza. He said this would expose the little army they had left them to too great a hazard; for if the design miscarried, it might occasion a revolt of the whole principality. Thus the humours of princes are often more regarded than their interest; the design of relieving Lerida was laid aside. The French army was diminished a fourth part, and the long siege had so fatigued them, that it was visible the raising it would be no difficult performance; but the thoughts of that being given over, Lerida capitulated in the beginning of November.” Both armies then went into winter quarters.
During the past summer, and throughout this winter, the Courts of London and Vienna were occupied with plans for Spain, especially as to the command of the troops. Lord Peterborough visited both those capitals, and also Turin, pleading for Lord Galway’s recall. Marlborough wrote to Comte Maffei (at Turin) on 19th May, warning him as to Peterborough: “You must express yourself to him with some precaution, for he has the gift of amplifying what one says, so as to give it quite a different turn from what one intended to say.” Still, this too clever Earl managed to collect sufficient expressions of dissatisfaction to tempt Marlborough to sacrifice Galway. But Godolphin, who could appreciate administrative talent, and Sunderland, who could sympathize with honour and disinterestedness, both of them knowing his loyal motives in accepting and retaining his high command, stood by him with immoveable constancy. “What you say of Lord Galway is certainly right,” Lord Godolphin wrote to the Duke, “and considering the unjust impression of the King of Spain in his prejudice, he cannot be of use there. But who can? Everybody that is there desires to leave the service and come home.“ And Lord Sunder-
- ↑ Among the Treasury Papers in our State-Paper Office there is one [dated about 31st December 1707] which is docqueted thus:— “Memorial of Colonel Thomas Allnut to the Lord High Treasurer, representing that the clothing for his regiment had been taken by Lord Galway for his Catalan battalion.”
