Daily globe., 1881-06-05
Who Lost Waterloo?

In a sense, CQ6 ndrSn EXPRESSIONS OF
Chesney and others about the utter
state of ignorance in which the en-
peror was as to the strategy of his
enemies, that he did not take at all
into consideration the possibility of
the march Of the whole PrusSian army
from Wavre to join Wellington, and
so on, are true. They are true so far
as this: that Napoleon, having in
trusted the whole duty of finding out
about the PrusSians-Where they were
and whether they were going to unite
with the English or MOTTO Grouchy,
and having given him competent
force and plenty of cavalry and an eX-
press warning as to the danger of the
union Of their army with the English,
had considered that he had done all
that was needful; and undoubtedly he
was taken by surprise when the blow
came. But they are not true in the
sense that Napoleon was throughout
blind to the possibility of this junction
of the allied armies, and took no
measures to prevent it. If an expe-
rienced sea captain, on approaching a
dangerous coast, intrusts the deck to
one of his officers. to whom he gives
a sufficient number of men, and whom
he warns to beware of the dangers
arising from the force of certain cur
rents, and then goes below, he is un-
doubtedly taken by surprise when the
ship runs ashore. In his berth, asleep,
he certainly did not forsee the catas-
trophe. His principal, if not his only,
fault was in his choice of the officer to
whom he intrusted the deck. AS to
his knowledge Of the perils Of that
part of the voyage, that cannot be
questioned.
So with Napoleon. His throwing
the entire responsibility of taking care
of the Prussians on Marshal Grouchy
was his chief fault, for Grouchy was
not able to sustain such bur-
den. Davoust. whom he might have
had, and ought to have had, in Grou-
chy's place, would have successfully
carried out his ideas. And while
fully admit the emperor's dilatoriness
on the morning of the 18th, by which
the concentration of: the Prussian
army at Wavre was assured, which
in fact made it impossible for Grouchy,
or for Davoust even, to prevent this
concentration and while also fully
admit the negligence Of the emperor
in leaving Grouchy so long without
any instructions, except the warning
of the possibly intended junction of
the allied armies contained in the
Bertrand letter, yet 1 cannot agree
with those who, like Chesney, say
that ''the notion that Grouchy is re-
sponsible for the Waterloo defeat must
be dismissed, by those who choose
to weigh the evidence, from the domain
of authentic history to the limbo
of national fgments." The response
bility must be divided between the
emperor and his lieutenant. Charg-
ing upon Napoleon, as we must, the
faults above specified, it must not yet
be forgotten that had Grouchy intel
ligently carried out the emperor's in
structiohs contained in the Bertrand
letter he might have been in a posi-
tiOn to defeat, or at least to hinder,
the junction of the allied armies.
It is hardly to be questioned that, if
Grouchy had moved at four o'clock in
the morning by way Of Mousty, and
had put himself in communication
with the main army, his forces would
have stopped thePrussian advance, and
allowed the emperor the use of his
whole army against the dukes forces,
which were inferior in numbers and
composition. Instead Of being obliged
to detach 10000 infantry against the
Prussians, Napoleon could have used
them against the English, and from
what we know Of the condition of
Welington's army in the latter part
of the afternoon the result would have
been decided victory for Napoleon.
If on the other hand, Grouchy had,
even as late as midday, changed his
plan, and following the advice of Ger
ard, had marched to join the emperor,
he would certainly have averted the
catastrophe, even ifh had arrived too
late to insure victory for his side.-
JOIN, &. Ropes IN June atlantic.
A Boon for Gentlemen.
An agency in Paris furnishes men to
o11o oo11c of HvoJ roRo ,oo, l. o,,~