FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230  
231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   >>   >|  
At that period I had been with Bonaparte more than two years, and during that time not a single despatch on any occasion arrived of the contents of which I was ignorant. How then should the news alluded to have escaped me? --[Details on the question of the correspondence of Napoleon with France while he was to Egypt will be found in Colonel Iung's work, Lucien Bonaparte (Paris. Charpentler, 1882), tome i. pp. 251-274. It seems most probable that Napoleon was in occasional communication with his family and with some of the Directors byway of Tunis and Tripoli. It would not be his interest to let his army or perhaps even Bourrienne know of the disasters in Italy till he found that they were sure to hear of them through the English. This would explain his affected ignorance till such a late date. On the 11th of April Barras received a despatch by which Napoleon stated his intention of returning to France if the news brought by Hamelin was confirmed. On the 26th of May 1799 three of the Directors, Barras, Rewbell, and La Reveillier-Lepeaux, wrote to Napoleon that Admiral Bruix had been ordered to attempt every means of bringing back his army. On the 15th of July Napoleon seems to have received this and other letters. On the 20th of July he warns Admiral Gantheaume to be ready to start. On the 11th of September the Directors formally approved the recall of the army from Egypt. Thus at the time Napoleon landed in France (on the 8th October), his intended return had been long known to and approved by the majority of the Directors, and had at last been formally ordered by the Directory. At the most he anticipated the order. He cannot be said to have deserted his post. Lantrey (tome i. p. 411) remarks that the existence and receipt of the letter from Joseph denied by Bourrienne is proved by Miot (the commissary, the brother of Miot de Melito) and by Joseph himself. Talleyrand thanks the French Consul at Tripoli for sending news from Egypt, and for letting Bonaparte know what passed in Europe. See also Ragusa (Marmont), tome i. p. 441, writing on 24th December 1798: "I have found an Arab of whom I am sure, and who shall start to-morrow for Derne. . . . This means can be need to send a letter to Tripoli, for boats often go there."] Almost all those who endeavour to avert from Bonaparte the reproach of desertion quote a letter from the
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230  
231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Napoleon
 

Bonaparte

 

Directors

 

France

 

Tripoli

 

letter

 

formally

 

Barras

 

received

 
Bourrienne

Admiral

 

ordered

 

Joseph

 

despatch

 

approved

 

receipt

 

denied

 
Lantrey
 
existence
 
remarks

landed

 

October

 

intended

 

recall

 

Gantheaume

 

September

 

return

 

anticipated

 
majority
 

Directory


deserted
 
letting
 

morrow

 
reproach
 
desertion
 
endeavour
 

Almost

 

December

 
Talleyrand
 
French

Consul
 

Melito

 

proved

 
commissary
 
brother
 

sending

 

Marmont

 

writing

 

Ragusa

 

passed