1828.] 
“—E 409 J 
‘MONTHLY REVIEW OF LITERATURE, DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN. 
. Lord Strangford and Colonel Napier’s 
Pamphlets ; 1828.—In his recent history of 
the Peninsular War, Col. Napier, speaking 
of the Portuguese emigration, charged Lord 
Strangford, our ambassador at Lisbon, with 
writing at Salt Hill the despatch relative to 
the emigration, though dated Hibernia, off 
the Tagus, 29th Nov., 1807, and in this 
despatch with claiming the whole merit of 
the emigration, though the credit was really 
due to Sir Sidney Smith—for the Prince 
Regent had actually sailed on the 27th Nov., 
before Lord Strangford could have reached 
Lisbon, or have had any “ official’ inter- 
view with him—and thus obtaining, by 
false representations, the red ribband, which 
by right should have blushed on the breast 
of Sir Sidney. 
* The statement was evidently on the face 
of it, hasty, and bore the marks of impro- 
bability ; it was utterly unlikely that any 
man in a public situation, like Lord Strang- 
ford, should commit himself by direct false- 
hoods. Accordingly from Lord Strangford’s 
reply, we find that he sailed immediately 
after the event with the messenger, and 
arrived with him in London on the 19th of 
December. When and where, therefore, 
the despatch was actually written, is perfectly 
unimportant, for he was in effect his own 
messenger. The account Lord Strangford 
gives is this—on the evening of his arrival, 
Mr. Canning sent for him to his house in 
Bruton-street, and expressed a wish, that the 
story of the Portuguese emigration, detailed 
by Lord Strangford in several and successive 
despatches should be drawn up in one un- 
broken narrative for publication in the Ga- 
 zette—omitting collateral matters—such as 
might compromise the safety of individuals 
—give notice to the enemy of intended opera- 
tions—or prove offensive to the government, 
to which he was again to be accredited. 
With this request Lord Strangford of course 
complied—and thus this “reduction”’ of his 
own dispatches, which appeared in the Ga- 
vette of the 22d, was certainly written not 
at sea, nor at Salt Hill, but in Bruton-street. 
Colonel Napier’s objection is a mere cavil. 
And with respect to his and Sir Sidney 
Smith’s merits in bringing about the emi- 
gration, Lord Strangford takes the story 
back to August—the period, when Bona- 
parte demanded of the Prince the confisca- 
tion of British property. On this occasion, 
Lord Strangford first suggested, on his own 
responsibility, the policy of an emigration 
to the Brazils, and within a month the 
Council at Mafra came to the resolution of 
crossing the Atlantic, on the event of two 
circumstances—the being compelled to con- 
fiscate British property, and actual invasion. 
In the meanwhile preparations were actively 
made for sailing, on the occurrence of the 
circumstances supposed. 
M.M. New Series,-~Vo1,. VI. No, 34. 
On the 8th of November the Prince, 
wisely or not, with necessity or without, 
complied with the reiterated demands of 
Bonaparte, detained the few British that 
had not yet fled, and confiscated their pro- 
perty—but no foreign troops yet appeared, 
and emigration was not yet carried into 
execution. In consequence, however, of 
this act of the Prince, Lord Strangford— 
his instructions leaving him no alternative— 
quitted Lisbon—having previously been as- 
sured by the Prince, that if the French ac- 
tually invaded, he was still resolved to go 
to the Brazils. The French did invade— 
and the Prince actually embarked on 
the 27th, 
On demanding his passport on the 10th, 
a ship of war was placed at his lordship’s 
disposal, but Sir Sidney Smith’s squadron 
appearing off the Tagus on the 16th, he 
took a boat and went on board the following 
day. From that time Sir Sidney and he 
acted in conjunction. On the 22d Sir 
Sydney wrote to the minister announcing 
hostilities, but the letter was not despatched. 
till the 24th, on which very day the final re- 
solution was taken at Mafra, and taken in 
consequence of the arrival of French troops, 
within the frontiers. Sir Sidney’s letter, 
therefore, whatever effect it was calculated 
to produce, had none on the resolution taken 
by the Court of Portugal. 
Colonel Napier imputes himself the emi- 
gration to fright, on learning from the 
Moniteur, of the 2nd of November, that the 
House of Braganza had ceased to reign. 
Unluckily for Colonel Napier’s accuracy and 
inference, no such declaration ever appeared 
in the Moniteur. . A sort of conditional de- 
claration appeared in the Journal de  Em- 
pire of the 3lst of October, and was copied 
in the Moniteur of the Ist of November. 
“ England would haye lost (or ruined) Den- 
mark, if that court had yielded to fear. . It 
is thus that she will have lost (or ruined) 
Portugal, and that the House of Braganza, 
if it makes common cause with England, 
will have ceased to reign.” 
We have, ourselves, no doubt of Colonel 
Napier’s industry, or of the general supe- 
riority of his book, as we expressed ourselves 
in our notice of it—but Colonel Napier has 
very manifestly his prejudices, and too 
readily gives vent to them—he assumes the 
tone of a radical—which is essentially and 
almost uniformly a vulgar and an oyer- 
charged one—he writes too like a partisan 
—with occasionally the flippancy of a news- 
paper. He professes himself altogether un- 
satisfied with Lord Strangford’s reply— 
though we really think it would be more 
creditable to his judgment and his candour, 
to have yielded a prompt and handsome 
concession. 
3G 
