Sitting of 23 January 1809

ORDERS IN COUNCIL.
Lord Aucklandstated, that a noble friend of his (lord Grenville), whose absence, en account of illness, he had to regret, but whose illness would not, he hoped, be of long continuance, had requested him to state to the house, that if he had been enabled to be present, he should have joined in every tribute of applause to the merits of sir Arthur Wellesley. His noble friend had also requested him to move, that the lords be summoned for this day fortnight, when it was the intention of his noble friend to bring forward a motion to address his majesty to rescind the Orders in Council; and to found that motion upon the Letter which had been published from Mr. Pinckney, the American minister, to our Government; and the Answer of the Secretary of State. It was requisite that those papers should be before the house, and his lordship, therefore, moved for the production of the Correspondence between the Ministers of the two Governments.
The Earl of Liverpoolwished to confine the production of papers to those which had been published by the American Government; and observed, that no communication was made to Parliament respecting America, because our existing relations with the United States were not in that state which would authorise such a communication.
Lord Aucklandagreed that no other papers than those mentioned were necessary; but, in consequence of some objection to the wording of the motion, his lordship withdrew it, with the intention of making it again to-morrow.
Lord Erskineexpressed his decided opinion, that if the proposition of the American Government, respecting the rescinding the Orders in Council, was not agreed to, there would be War between the United States and France in a month.

VOTE OF THANKS. BATTLE OF VI-MIERA.
The Earl of Liverpoolrose, in pursuance of notice, to move the Thanks of the house to lieutenant general sir Arthur Wellesley. His lordship briefly detailed the circumstances of the two actions, on the 17th and 21st of August, and spoke in the highest terms of the skilful disposition made by sir A. Wellesley upon those occasions, and the energy and ability displayed by that gallant officer in the battles. He trusted, therefore, that there would be an unanimous Vote of Thanks

107
upon an occasion in which those Thanks were so well merited, and without any reference to circumstances which occurred after sir Arthur had ceased to command. In consequence of some private intimation, he wished to say a few words with respect to the name of sir Harry Burrard not being included. It was true that sir Harry Burrard nominally had the command, at a part of the period alluded to; but the actual command, until the conclusion of the Battle of Vimiera, remained with sir A. Wellesley, who made all the dispositions, and carried them into execution. It was for that reason that the thanks were con-fined to sir Arthur. A similar instance occurred in the case of the Battle of the Nile, for which thanks were voted to lord Nelson, who was the actual commander upon that occasion, and not to earl St. Vincent, under whose command lord Nelson was; and in the case of the former expedition to Copenhagen, sir Hyde Parker was merely thanked for the disposition, and lord Nelson for the execution. In the present instance, sir Harry Burrard had, with great magnanimity, declined to interfere with the command, until after the Battle of Vimiera was over. Upon these grounds it was that the motion of thanks was confined to sir Arthur Wellesley, as the actual Commander. His lordship concluded by moving the Thanks of the house to lieut. gen. sir A. Wellesley, K. B. for the skill, valour, and ability displayed by him on the 17th and 21st of August, and particularly on the latter day, in the Battle of Vimiera.
The Earl of Moirawas aware that it appeared very ungracious to interpose any thing like a dissent to a motion of this nature, but he thought it his duty upon the present occasion to enter his protest against the mode now proposed by the noble earl, of voting the thanks of the house. The painful task had fallen to his lot of investigating, as a member of the Court of Inquiry, the circumstances which led to the late transactions in Portugal; and after what then transpired, he could not consent that the name of sir Harry Burrard should be left out of the Vote of Thanks, and thereby, in fact, that the severest censure should be passed upon him. It was ascertained by the examination of sir Harry Burrard before the Court of Inquiry, that that respectable officer had the command of the army on the 20th, and that on the 21st, on arriving at Vimiera, he approved of the dispositions made by sir Arthur in the battle, and thereby made
108
himself responsible fir all those disposiions. Had our army been defeated, sir Harry must have participated in the shame of the defeat, surely then justice required that he should partake of the triumph of the victory. With respect to the conduct of sir Harry Burrard, he (lord M.) had not been able, with the aid of all the evidence examined by the Court of Inquiry, to make up his mind as to the point, whether it was proper to advance the army after the battle; so far, however, as he was enabled to form an opinion, he conceived the conduct of sir Harry upon that occasion to have been judicious. He could not, therefore, considering that sir Harry Burrard had all the responsibility of the command upon him, consent that the name of that Officer should be omitted in the Vote of Thanks, and should move an Amendment for the purpose of having his name inserted.
Lord Harrowbycontended, that sir Harry Burrard had, in his own dispatch, expressly disclaimed any share in the victory, he having with great magnanimity allowed the whole of the actual command during the battle to remain with sir A. Wellesley. To include sir Harry in the Vote of Thanks, would be giving an opinion upon subsequent circumstances, respecting which no information was before the house.
Viscount Sidmouthsaid, that he anticipated the objections made by the noble lord who moved the amendment, and had given them full consideration. The result of that consideration was that he could not agree to them. He did not feel that a Vote of Thanks to sir A. Wellesley could attach the least discredit to the character of sir II. Burrard. He cordially assented to the original motion, and regretted that his noble friend had not made it the day after the meeting of the house. He paid some high compliments to the merit of sir A. Wellesley, and described the victory which had been obtained by the army under his command, as one of the most brilliant that graced the annals of the country. He recommended to the noble baron to withdraw the amendment.
Lord Erskine,in offering himself to the consideration of their lordships, begged to premise that he was altogether unacquainted with sir H. Burrard or his family, and that he did not even know that he had ever seen his person; at the same time he was ready to give the highest possible praise to sir A. Wellesley, which his warmest and most enthusiastic admirers

109
could devise, and to acknowledge he had eminently conducted himself, not only on the present occasion, but on every former opportunity that had offered itself; but he would beg leave to ask one plain question; Was sir H. Burrard in the chief command on the 21st August or not? If he were, he was entitled to the admiration of his country, and the thanks of their lordships, for having embraced those plant and adopted those measures, which he found his predecessor in the pursuit of. For his part, he had spent the earlier part of his days in the service, and was acquainted with its details, and his lordship thought, that however wise and skilful previous plans might have been found, yet in the moment of action much might depend upon the events arising from the exertions of individuals, whether from skill or accident. In the navy, for instance, when the commander-in-chief had arranged his plans, and rushed into the battle, in the midst of smoke and confusion, much of the success might be fairly attributable to the efforts of a captain, or even the hardy intrepidity of a common seaman; and yet, he believed it had never occurred to any one, that the commander was the less deserving of his tribute of praise.—Thus, if their lordships should agree to the amendment proposed by his noble friend, the world would do ample justice, by apportioning to each of the gallant commanders his due share of praise; to the one for the wisdom of his plans and the gallantry of their execution, and to the other for his magnanimity and good sense displayed in their adoption. Suppose, for instance, during the course of an engagement, an officer, subordinate in command, had the good fortune to perceive, and the skill to embrace, the opportunity of making such a movement as to be productive of signal advantages in deciding the fortune of the day, were their lordships prepared to say that the commander-in-chief should not receive those thanks which the victory deserved? Upon the subject of the Vote of Thanks to sir H. Burrard, his lordship professed himself at a total loss to conceive what could be the objection to it. Would any noble lord state, that the gallant general himself disclaimed it, or that he had signified his indifference to their approbation? If such an avowal as this should be made, he for one should rest satisfied, and feel relieved from all embarrassment on the subject. Money, he believed, was an object
110
of desire with most men; he was sure soldiers and sailors loved to acquire it; but to them in particular was not praise an object of the most ardent desire? With respect, therefore, to sir H. Burrard, as it could not be denied that he held the chief command during the engagement of the 2lst August, he would put it to the feelings and honour of their lordships, whether, when he approved and adopted the arrangements previously made he was not entitled to praise? and whether, as commander-in-chief, he might not, had he thought proper, have disapproved of those arrangements, and have substituted others in their room? and, therefore, having all the responsibility, whether, he was not eminently entitled to their lordships thanks? Impressed with these sentiments, he felt himself bound to support the proposed amendment.
The Earl of Moira,for the sake of regularity, moved an adjournment of the question, for the purpose of introducing a motion of thanks to sir Harry Burrard.
Lord Mulgracehad conceived that the business, as it originally stood, would have been a mere Vote of Thanks, unmixed with other matter, and, as such, not liable to the slightest opposition; but the amendment proposed by the noble earl had given rise to a question, how far the silence of the Vote of Thanks to sir Arthur Wellesley, with regard to sir Harry Burrard, tended to stigmatise the latter? His lordship declared that if it had the slightest tendency in his mind to any such conclusion, he would be the last man to agree to it. But he would ask, did it do so, when it must be acknowledged, on all hands, that the services of the latter were at all events less brilliant than those of the former? A noble and learned lord had declared he was wholly unacquainted with sir Harry Burrard; but his lordship knew him well, and also his sentiments on the subject; and he knew that the gallant general utterly disclaimed all right to thanks which he felt he had not earned. Their lordships had heard of the Court of Inquiry, and the sentiments arising thereon; but the proceedings of that court were not before their lordships, and they could form no opinion therefrom; but there was a document which their lordships were bound to know, and that was the Gazettes. What did they say? In them sir Harry declares he saw no necessity for interfering in the arrangements he found made by sir Arthur,

111
and that therefore he had directed him to proceed in completing the work which he had so happily begun. Did their lordships imagine that the gallant general would take to himself thanks for merely acting thus? In adopting such measures, he had not only evinced the most scrupulous honour, but the soundest discretion, by declining to interfere when he saw the measures taken were wisely taken; here, therefore, was a clear and convincing proof that he disclaimed all praise on the subject. It had been said that sir Harry was present during the action, as commander-in-chief, but did he make the report of the proceedings? In the ordinary course of proceedings, if he had conceived himself as acting on that occasion in that capacity, he should have done so; but he disdained it, and, with a delicacy which reflected the highest honour on him, he caused the rain who had rendered the service, to make the report of that service; he knew he had done nothing to deserve it; and his lordship was sure he would only be stung at the thought of thanks bestowed when he was conscious of not having earned them. Their lordships had now to decide whether any thanks at all were to be given? And to determine that question he would boldly ask, is sir A. Wellesley's victory found wanting in the scale when compared with any, the most brilliant achievement to be found in military story? His lordship saw in it everything that was dignified and transcendant, uniting together at once the soundest judgment with the most prompt decision; collecting as it were by magic the means of commencing his march to meet the enemy; carrying with him the confidence of the country in his progress; reaching that enemy, posted in a superior and difficult situation; and lastly, in the short space of twenty-one days, bringing to issue that great question, which was more likely to succeed, attack or defence between contending armies? having in the attack made by him on the 17th, and the defence of the 21st August, proved himself eminently superior in both. It was the glory of sir Harry Burrard to have duly admired and done justice to these services; and on these grounds his lordship was adverse to mixing them together in the same vote.
The Earl of Buckinghamshireexpressed his concurrence in what had fallen from other noble lords, with respect to the brilliant nature of the victories of sir A.
112
Wellesley, and the officers and army under his command, and it was therefore scarcely necessary for him to say, that he heartily assented to the motion of thanks. The chief object for which he rose was, to put a question to the noble lord who proposed the thanks to sir H. Burrard. He disclaimed any intention to cast a reflection upon sir H. Burrard; but from what he had heard and read it appeared, that if the victory of the 21st had been followed up, the result would have been much more brilliant than it was. He would ask, what were the sentiments of generals Spencer and Ferguson, and others, who were on the spot, on that subject? He felt interested in the honour and character of sir A. Wellesley, and naturally, therefore, wished for an explanation. The only act of sir H. Burrard, with respect to the battle, was stopping the pursuit.
The Earl of Moirareplied, that general Ferguson had given it as his opinion, that, if permitted to advance, he would have, cut off a part of the enemy. General Spencer's opinion, as to the propriety of advancing, was given in a very cautious manner, and he stated that he saw a body of the enemy, probably the whole of their left wing, forming three miles in front of his division. With the hourly expectation of the arrival of the reinforcements under sir J. Moore, which would render the effecting of the object certain, sir H. Burrard chose to stop, rather than to make a movement which, under the circumstances, was undoubtedly hazardous. Although the movement, if made, would probably, from the superiority of the British soldiers, have been successful, yet he could not but think the conduct of sir H. Burrard judicious, as he might naturally think that a little delay would have brought the probability to a certainty. Sir H. Burrard had the command of the army; he was present for a great part of the time in the hottest of the engagement, and had a duty to perform, of which he could not divest himself. The responsibility rested with him, and he controuled the opinion of sir A. Wellesley respecting the advance to Torres Vedras. Sir H. Burrard must be considered, therefore, as acting the whole of the day, and ought not to by left out of the motion of thanks.
Earl Grosvenorwished this question had not been brought forward till the papers respecting the expedition had been laid on the table—the want of which occasioned

113
these difficulties. The noble earl adverted to the doubtful and contradictory statements respecting the numbers of the enemy, and other circumstances, which had a material relation to this subject, as well as to the Convention and Armistice, of which he particularly condemned the Russian Article. But although he thought the best course would have been to have waited for the production of the papers, he could not refuse his assent to the motion.
Lord Aucklandsaid, he had listened to the present discussion with considerable uneasiness. His noble friend had certainly supported the amendment which he had proposed, with all his usual talent and force of reasoning; at the same time it was evident, that it was desirable, in order to give full effect to the thanks of the house, that they should be given unanimously, and as it were, by acclamation; but his noble friend must be aware that his amendment would meet with opposition, since so much difference of opinion on the subject evidently existed. He hoped, therefore, the noble baron would not press his amendment.
The question being put on the amendment of lord Moira, it was negatived, without a division, and with only one or two dissentient voices. The original motion was then put, upon which lord Moira observed, that though his amendment had been negatived, yet he heartily concurred in the testimony which had been paid to the merits and gallantry of sir A. Wellesley. The motion was then unanimously agreed to.

PROTEST ON THE ABOVE VOTE OF THANKS.
The following Protest of the earl of Moira, as baron Hastings, was entered on the Journals:
"Dissentient; Because it has been established by evidence in a public Court, that lieut. gen. sir Harry Burrard was in the Field throughout the whole of the Action at Vimiera, exercising Command; and no officer has the power of disqualifying himself, or of divesting himself of the Trust reposed in him by his Sovereign. On this account I cannot agree to leave out the name of lieut. gen. sir Harry Burrard, no neglect or misconduct having been imputed to him, from the Thanks of this House to those who achieved the glorious Victory at Vimiera.
(Signed) HASTINCS, &C. &C."