|
| |
| John Somers, Lord Somers and Ex-Chancellor. | |
| Evelyn Pierrepoint, Marquis of Dorchester (afterwards Duke of Kingston-upon-Hull). | |
| 36. | William Cowper, Lord Cowper and Ex-Chancellor (afterwards Earl). |
The motion to censure the late ministry, proposed by the Earl of Scarsdale, was carried next day by 68 to 48. During the debate the abused statesmen not only defended themselves, but took occasion to justify Lord Galway and his comrades, in spite of last night’s vote.
The Earl of Sunderland said, “It was the general opinion and desire of the nation that the Earl of Galway should march again to Madrid, and all the ministry then were unanimous in their opinion for an offensive war. Many inconveniences might have attended the dividing of the army.” The Duke of Marlborough, after repeating that troops from Spain formed no item of the projected armament against Toulon, said, “As for the war in Spain, it was the general opinion of England that it should be offensive. And as to my Lord Peterborough’s projects, I can assure your lordships that one of the greatest instances that Holland and Savoy made was, that the Emperor and we should not insist upon an expedition to Naples which might hinder the other design. My lords, my intentions were always honest and sincere to contribute all that lay in my power to bring this heavy and expensive war to an end. God Almighty has blessed my endeavours with success. But if men are to be censured when they give their opinions to the best of their understandings, I must expect to be found fault with as well as the rest. My Lord Galway and everybody in Spain have done their duty. And though I must own that Lord has been unhappy, and that he had no positive orders for a battle, yet I must do him the justice to say, that the whole council of war were of his opinion, to fight the enemy before the coming up of the Duke of Orleans with a reinforcement of ten or twelve thousand men. On the other hand, I must confess I do not understand how the separating of the army would have favoured the siege of Toulon.”
The speaker was interrupted by the Earl of Peterborough, who said, “There was a necessity for dividing the troops to go to Madrid.”
The Duke of Marlborough continued, “I will not contradict that Lord as to the situation of the country, but this separation of the army could not be in order to a defensive but to an offensive war — which, in my opinion, was the best way to make a diversion, and thereby hinder the French from relieving Toulon. But, after all, that unhappy battle had no other effect but to put us upon the defensive. For the French troops that were detached from Spain never came before Toulon.”
The Duke of Shrewsbury admitted that the Lord Galway had a good reason to fight, because he could not help it. But that there was no reason for the ministers here to give that opinion, because nothing forced them to it.
The Duke of Devonshire urged that, since the allies could not subsist without fighting, it was unreasonable to censure the generals who gave their opinions for a battle. And Lord Somers said, that the ill success of the battle of Almanza was no good argument against the counsel for an offensive war, for if they judged of opinions by subsequent events, no man would be safe. The proceedings ended on this 12th day of January by the censure of the ex-ministers, as already stated.
As to Lord Galway, the votes amounted to no real censure, opinions given in a council of war being privileged, and the primary responsibility of fighting having been accepted by Lord Sunderland in name of the late ministry. The Harley- Bolingbroke ministry, therefore, were anxious to carry some other vote, which the outer world might believe to be a censure. The reader will remember that the Portuguese formed the right wing at the battle of Almanza; this post of honour they occupied during the whole war, both in their own country and in Spain. It seemed to the semi-Jacobite lords, on Wednesday the 17th, that a vote to blacken Lord Galway might be got out of this, and they sent him a summons to appear at their bar on Monday the 22d. The cotemporary papers inform us:—
“My Lord Galway being indisposed with rheumatism and the gout, and therefore unable to obey that order, the Lords sent him a question in writing, namely, Why, whilst he commanded the British forces in Spain, he gave the right to the Portuguese? To this the Earl of Galway sent an answer, importing that by the treaty with Portugal, the troops of that crown were to have the right in their own country; and that in order to engage them to march to Madrid, he was obliged to allow them the same honour; for otherwise they would never have stirred out of Portugal.”[1]
A motion was therefore concocted, and solemnly proposed, “That the Earl of
- ↑ Mylord Gallway repondit, que par le traitté avec le Portugal les troupes de cette couronne devoient avoir la droite dans leur pays sur les troupes Angloises — que pour les engager à marcher en Espagne il avoit été oblige de leur faire ce même honneur, et qu’ autrement elles n’auroient jamais quitté le Portugal. Il dit qu’il n’avoit pas cru de voir sacrifier tous les avantages, que la Grande Alliance pouvoit retirer de la marche de l’Armeé Portuguaise, à un point d’honneur qui, bien que fort delicat, ne pouvoit entrer en balance avec la necessité de cette marche, d’ou dependoit l’acquisition ou la perte de toute l’Espagne. — De Cize, Whigism et Torisme p. 300.
