Chapter XCIV (2)

"Upon the subject of General Buonaparte's escape, M. Gourgaud stated
confidently, that although Longwood was, from its situation, capable
of being well protected by sentries, yet he was certain that there
would be no difficulty in eluding at any time the vigilance of the
sentries posted round the house and grounds; and, in short, that
escape from the island appeared to him in no degree impracticable.
The subject, he confessed, had been discussed at Longwood amongst
the individuals of the establishment, who were separately desired to
give their plans for effecting it. But he expressed his belief to
be, that General Buonaparte was so fully impressed with the opinion,
that he would be permitted to leave St. Helena, either upon a change
of ministry in England, or by the unwillingness of the English to
bear the expense of detaining him, that he would not at present run
the hazard to which an attempt to escape might expose him. It
appeared, however, from the statement of General Gourgaud, and from
other circumstances stated by him, that Buonaparte had always looked
to the period of the removal of the allied armies from France as
that most favourable for his return; and the probability of such an
event, and the consequences which would flow from it, were urged by
him as an argument to dissuade General Gourgaud from quitting him
until after that period."

[Sidenote: WARDEN--O'MEARA, ETC.]

General Gourgaud's communications further bear, what, indeed, can be collected from many other circumstances, that as Napoleon hoped to obtain his liberty from the impression to be made on the minds of the English nation, he was careful not to suffer his condition to be forgotten, and most anxious that the public mind should be carefully kept alive to it, by a succession of publications coming out one after another, modified according to the different temper and information of the various authors, but bearing all of them the stamp of having issued in whole or in part from the interior of Longwood. Accordingly, the various works of Warden,[226] O'Meara,[227] Santini,[228] the letter of Montholon,[229] and other publications upon St. Helena,[230] appeared one after another, to keep the subject awake; which, although seemingly discharged by various hands, bear the strong peculiarity of being directed at identically the same mark, and of being arrows from the same quiver. Gourgaud mentioned this species of file-firing, and its purpose. Even the _Manuscrit de St. Hélène_, a tract, in which dates and facts were misplaced and confounded, was also, according to General Gourgaud, the work of Buonaparte, and composed to puzzle and _mystify_ the British public. He told Sir Hudson Lowe that he was not to consider the abuse in these various pamphlets as levelled against him personally, but as written upon political calculation, with the view of extorting some relaxation of vigilance by the reiteration of complaints. The celebrated Letter of Montholon was, according to the same authority, written in a great measure by Napoleon; and the same was the case with Santini's, though so grossly over coloured that he himself afterwards disowned it.[231] Other papers, he said, would appear under the names of captains of merchantmen and the like, for Napoleon was possessed by a mania for scribbling, which had no interruption. It becomes the historian, therefore, to receive with caution the narratives of those who have thus taken a determinedly partial part in the controversy, and concocted their statements from the details afforded by the party principally concerned. If what General Gourgaud has said be accurate, it is Napoleon who is pleading his own cause under a borrowed name, in the pages of O'Meara, Santini, Montholon, &c. Even when the facts mentioned in these works, therefore, are undeniable, still it is necessary to strip them of exaggeration, and place them in a fair and just light before pronouncing on them.

The evidence of O'Meara, as contained in a _Voice from St. Helena_, is that of a disappointed man, bitterly incensed against Sir Hudson Lowe, as the cause of his disappointment. He had no need to kindle the flame of his own resentment, at that of Buonaparte. But it may be granted that their vindictive feelings must have strengthened each other. The quarrel was the more irreconcilable, as it appears that Dr. O'Meara was originally in great habits of intimacy with Sir Hudson Lowe, and in the custom of repeating at Plantation-house the gossip which he had heard at Longwood. Some proofs of this were laid before the public, in the _Quarterly Review_;[232] and Sir Hudson Lowe's correspondence with government contains various allusions to Mr. O'Meara's authority,[233] down to the period when their mutual confidence was terminated by a violent quarrel.[234]

Count Las Cases is not, in point of impartiality, to be ranked much above Dr. O'Meara. He was originally a French emigrant, a worshipper by profession of royalty, and therefore only changed his idol, not his religion, when he substituted the idol Napoleon for the idol Bourbon. He embraces with passive obedience the interests of his chief, real or supposed, and can see nothing wrong which Napoleon is disposed to think right. He was also the personal enemy of Sir Hudson Lowe. We have no idea that he would falsify the truth; but we cannot but suspect the accuracy of his recollection, when we find he inserts many expressions and incidents in his Journal, long after the period at which it was originally written, and it is to be presumed from memory. Sir Hudson Lowe had the original manuscript for some time in his possession, and we have at present before us a printed copy, in which Sir Hudson has, with his own hand, marked those additions which had been made to the Journal since he saw it in its primitive state. It is remarkable that all, or almost all, the additions which are made to the Journal, consist of passages highly injurious to Sir Hudson Lowe, which had no existence in the original manuscript. These additions must therefore have been made under the influence of recollection, sharpened by angry passions, since they did not at first seem important enough to be preserved. When memory is put on the rack by passion and prejudice, she will recollect strange things; and, like witnesses under the actual torture, sometimes avow what never took place.

[Sidenote: ANTOMMARCHI.]

Of Dr. Antommarchi it is not necessary to say much; he was a legatee of Buonaparte, and an annuitant of his widow, besides being anxious to preserve the countenance of his very wealthy family. He never speaks of Sir Hudson Lowe without rancour. Sir Hudson's first offence against him was inquiring for clandestine correspondence;[235] his last was, preventing the crowd at Napoleon's funeral from pulling to pieces the willow-trees by which the grave was sheltered, besides placing a guard over the place of sepulture.[236] What truth is there, then, to be reposed in an author, who can thus misrepresent two circumstances--the one imposed on Sir Hudson Lowe by his instructions; the other being what decency and propriety, and respect to the deceased, imperatively demanded?

The mass of evidence shows, that to have remained upon good, or even on decent terms with the governor, would not have squared with the politics of one who desired to have grievances to complain of; and who, far from having the usual motives which may lead a captive and his keeper to a tolerable understanding, by a system of mutual accommodation, wished to provoke the governor, if possible, beyond the extent of human patience, even at the risk of subjecting himself to some new infliction, which might swell the list of wrongs which he was accumulating to lay before the public.

What we have stated above is exemplified by Napoleon's reception of Sir Hudson Lowe, against whom he appears to have adopted the most violent prejudices at the very first interview, and before the governor could have afforded him the slightest disrespect. We quote it, because it shows that the mind of the prisoner was made up to provoke and insult Sir Hudson, without waiting for any provocation on his part.

The governor's first aggression (so represented,) was his requiring permission of _General Buonaparte_ to call together his domestics, with a view to their taking the declaration required by the British Government, binding themselves to abide by the rules laid down for the custody of Buonaparte's person. This permission was refused in very haughty terms. If Napoleon had been at the Tuileries, such a request could not have been more highly resented. The servants, however, appeared, and took the necessary declaration. But the affront was not cancelled; "Sir Hudson Lowe had put his finger betwixt Napoleon and his valet-de-chambre." This was on the 27th April, 1816.[237]

Upon the 30th, the governor again paid his respects at Longwood, and was received with one of those calculated bursts of furious passion with which Napoleon was wont to try the courage and shake the nerves of those over whom he desired to acquire influence. He spoke of protesting against the Convention of Paris, and demanded what right the sovereigns therein allied had to dispose of one, their equal always, and often their superior. He called upon the governor for death or liberty--as if it had been in Sir Hudson Lowe's power to give him either the one or the other. Sir Hudson enlarged on the conveniences of the building which was to be sent from England, to supply the present want of accommodation. Buonaparte repelled the proposed consolation with fury. It was not a house that he wanted, it was an executioner and a line. These he would esteem a favour; all the rest was but irony and insult. Sir Hudson Lowe could in reply only hope that he had given no personal offence, and was reminded of his review of the domestics; which reproach he listened to in silence.[238]

Presently afterwards, Napoleon fell on a new and cutting method of exercising Sir Hudson's patience. A book on the campaign of 1814,[239] lay on the table. Napoleon turned up some of the English bulletins, and asked, with a tone which was perfectly intelligible, whether the governor had not been the writer of these letters. Being answered in the affirmative, Napoleon, according to Dr. O'Meara, told Sir Hudson they were full of folly and falsehood; to which the governor, with more patience than most men could have commanded on such an occasion, replied, "I believe I saw what I have stated;"[240] an answer certainly as temperate as could be returned to so gratuitous an insult. After Sir Hudson left the room in which he had been received with so much unprovoked incivility, Napoleon is described as having harangued upon the sinister expression of his countenance, abused him in the coarsest manner, and even caused his valet-de-chambre throw a cup of coffee out of the window, because it had stood a moment on the table beside the governor.[241]

Every attempt at conciliation on the part of the governor, seemed always to furnish new subjects of irritation. He sent fowling-pieces to Longwood, and Napoleon returned for answer, it was an insult to give fowling-pieces where there is no game; though Santini, by the way, pretended to support the family in a great measure by his gun. Sir Hudson sent a variety of clothes and other articles from England, which it might be supposed the exiles were in want of. The thanks returned were, that the governor treated them like paupers, and that the articles ought, in due respect, to have been left at the store, or governor's house, while a list was sent to the Emperor's household, that such things were at their command if they had any occasion for them. On a third occasion, Sir Hudson resolved to be cautious. He had determined to give a ball; but he consulted Dr. O'Meara whether Napoleon would take it well to be invited. The doctor foresaw that the fatal address, _General Buonaparte_, would make shipwreck of the invitation. The governor proposed to avoid this stumbling-block, by asking Napoleon verbally and in person. But with no name which his civility could devise for the invitation, could it be rendered acceptable. A governor of St. Helena, as Napoleon himself observed, had need to be a person of great politeness, and at the same time of great firmness.

[Sidenote: RUPTURE WITH SIR H. LOWE.]

At length, on 18th August, a decisive quarrel took place. Sir Hudson Lowe was admitted to an audience, at which was present Sir Pulteney Malcolm, the admiral who now commanded on the station. Dr. O'Meara has preserved the following account of the interview, as it was detailed by Napoleon to his suite, the day after it took place.

"'That governor,' said Napoleon, 'came here yesterday to annoy me.
He saw me walking in the garden, and in consequence, I could not
refuse to see him. He wanted to enter into some details with me
about reducing the expenses of the establishment. He had the
audacity to tell me that things were as he found them, and that he
came up to justify himself; that he had come up two or three times
before to do so, but that I was in a bath.' I replied, 'No, sir, I
was not in a bath; but I ordered one on purpose not to see you. In
endeavouring to justify yourself you make matters worse.' He said,
that I did not know him; that, if I knew him, I should change my
opinion. 'Know you, sir!' I answered, 'how could I know you? People
make themselves known by their actions--by commanding in battles.
You have never commanded in battle. You have never commanded any but
vagabond Corsican deserters, Piedmontese and Neapolitan brigands. I
know the name of every English general who has distinguished
himself; but I never heard of you, except as a _scrivano_ [clerk] to
Blucher, or as a commandant of brigands. You have never commanded,
or been accustomed to men of honour.' He said, that he had not
sought for his present situation. I told him that such employments
were not asked for; that they were given by governments to people
who had dishonoured themselves. He said, that he only did his duty,
and that I ought not to blame him, as he only acted according to his
orders. I replied, 'So does the hangman; he acts according to his
orders. But when he puts a rope about my neck to finish me, is that
a reason that I should like that hangman, because he acts according
to his orders? Besides, I do not believe that any government could
be so mean as to give such orders as you cause to be executed.' I
told him, that if he pleased, he need not send up any thing to eat;
that I would go over and dine at the table of the brave officers of
the 53d; that I was sure there was not one of them who would not be
happy to give a plate at the table to an old soldier; that there was
not a soldier in the regiment who had not more heart than he had;
that in the iniquitous bill of Parliament, they had decreed that I
was to be treated as a prisoner; but that he treated me worse than a
condemned criminal or a galley slave, as they were permitted to
receive newspapers and printed books, of which he deprived me.' I
said, 'You have power over my body, but none over my soul. That soul
is as proud, fierce, and determined at the present moment, as when
it commanded Europe.' I told him that he was a _sbirro Siciliano_
(Sicilian thief-taker,) and not an Englishman; and desired him not
to let me see him again until he came with orders to despatch me,
when he would find all the doors thrown open to admit him.'"[242]

It is not surprising that this extreme violence met with some return on Sir Hudson's part. He told Napoleon that his language was uncivil and ungentlemanlike, and that he would not remain to listen to it. Accordingly, he left Longwood without even the usual salutation.

Upon these occasions, we think it is evident that Napoleon was the wilful and intentional aggressor, and that his conduct proceeded either from the stings of injured pride, or a calculated scheme, which made him prefer being on bad rather than good terms with Sir Hudson Lowe. On the other hand, we could wish that the governor had avoided entering upon the subject of the expenses of his detention with Napoleon in person. The subject was ill-chosen, and could produce no favourable result.

They never afterwards met in friendship, or even on terms of decent civility; and having given this account of their final quarrel, it only remains for us to classify, in a general manner, the various subjects of angry discussion which took place betwixt them, placed in such uncomfortable relative circumstances, and each determined not to give way to the other's arguments, or accommodate himself to the other's wishes or convenience.

FOOTNOTES:

[219]

Et tragicus plerumque dolet sermone pedestri.
Telephus et Peleus, cum pauper et exul uterque,
Projicit ampullas et sesquipedalia verba.

HOR. _Ars Poetica._

"Princes will sometimes mourn their lot in prose.
Peleus and Telephus, broke down by woes,
In indigence and exile forced to roam,
Leave sounding phrase, and long-tail'd words, at home."--S.

[220] Parl. Debates, vol. xxx., p. 377.

[221] "In default of America, I prefer England to any other country. I shall take the name of Colonel Meuron, or of Duroc."--_Instructions to Gourgaud_, July 13, 1815; Savary, tom. iv., p. 162.

[222] Parl. Debates, vol. xxxiii., p. 213.

[223] Parl. Debates, vol. xxxiii., p. 235.

[224] "_Je le répète, il peut s'évader seul, et aller en Amérique quand il le voudra._" Taken from a report of Baron Sturmer to Prince Metternich, giving an account of General Gourgaud's communications, dated 14th March, 1818.--S.

[225] "_Je ne puis plus vivre en particulier. J'aime mieux être prisonnier ici, que abre aux Etats Unis._"--S.

[226] Warden's Letters from St. Helena.

[227] Voice from St. Helena, &c.

[228] Appeal to the British Nation, &c. By M. Santini, Porter of the Emperor's closet.

[229] Official Memoir, dictated by Napoleon; being a Letter from Count de Montholon to Sir Hudson Lowe.

[230] Manuscrit venu de St. Hélène d'une manière inconnue, &c.

[231] "Santini has published a brochure full of trash. There are some truths in it; but every thing is exaggerated."--NAPOLEON, _Voice_, &c., vol. ii., p. 76.

[232] Vol. xxviii., p. 227.

[233] Sir Hudson Lowe writes, for example, to Lord Bathurst, 13th May, 1816:--"Having found Dr. O'Meara, who was attached to Buonaparte's family on the removal of his French physician, very useful in giving information in many instances, and as, if removed, it might be difficult to find another person who might be equally agreeable to General Buonaparte, I have deemed it advisable to suffer him to remain in the family on the same footing as before my arrival." On the 29th of March, 1817, Sir Hudson writes:--"Dr. O'Meara had informed me of the conversations that had occurred, and, with that readiness which he always manifests upon such occasions, immediately wrote them down for me."--S.

[234] "A catastrophe seemed inevitable. Napoleon indeed concluded that there was a determination to bring it about. On the 6th of May, he sent for O'Meara, in order that he might learn his personal position. He desired me to express to him in English, that he had hitherto no cause of complaint against him. It was necessary, he said, to come to an understanding. Was he to consider him as his own physician personally, or merely as a prison doctor, appointed by the English Government? Was he his confessor or his inspector? _Had he made reports respecting him_, or was it his intention to do so if called upon. The doctor replied with great firmness, and in a tone of feeling. He said he had made _no report_ respecting the Emperor, and that he could not imagine any instance in which he might be induced to make a report, except in case of serious illness."--LAS CASES, tom. i., p. 211.

[235] Last Days of the Emperor Napoleon, vol. i., p. 60.

[236] Last Days of the Emperor Napoleon, vol. ii., p. 185.

[237] Las Cases, tom. ii., p. 89.

[238] Las Cases, tom. ii., p. 115-120.

[239] Hist. de la Campagne de 1814 par Alphonse de Beauchamp.

[240] "It appears that this governor was with Blucher, and is the writer of some official letters to your government, descriptive of part of the operations of 1814. I pointed them out to him, and asked him, '_Est-ce vous, Monsieur?_' He replied, 'Yes.' I told him that they were _pleines de faussetés et de sottises_. He shrugged up his shoulders, and replied, '_J'ai cru voir cela_.'"--_Voice_, &c., vol. i., p. 49.

[241] Las Cases, tom. i., p. 121.

[242] _Voice_, &c., vol. i., p. 93.--"The Emperor admitted that he had, during this conversation, seriously and repeatedly offended Sir Hudson Lowe; and he also did him the justice to acknowledge, that Sir Hudson had not precisely shown, in a single instance, any want of respect; he had contented himself with muttering, between his teeth, sentences which were not audible. The only failure, perhaps, on the part of the governor, and which was trifling, compared with the treatment he had received, was the abrupt way in which he retired, while the admiral withdrew slowly, and with numerous salutes."--LAS CASES, tom. iii., p. 222.