Page:Protestant Exiles from France Agnew vol 1.djvu/334

 A faint-heartedness came over King Pedro’s counsels. He seemed to think more of preventing Philip from crossing his frontier than of taking Charles to look the Spaniards in the face. Philip sent the Duke of Berwick to beat up the Portuguese quarters; and, as Burnet has concisely said, some of the English and Dutch battalions which were posted where they could not be relieved, in places which were not tenable, fell into the hands of the Spaniards, and were made prisoners of war. Schomberg was quite paralysed by the thorough infatuation of the government of Lisbon.

King Pedro wrote to England declaring himself dissatisfied with Schomberg, though unable to vindicate the Portuguese officers. Secretary Sir Charles Hedges wrote to our Ambassador in Piedmont, the Right Hon. Richard Hill, from London, 23d June:— “The King of Portugal seeming dissatisfied with the Duke of Schomberg, Her Majesty is inclined to recall him, if there be not a better understanding between them, that the service may not suffer; and we hope that King will show his resentment against some of his officers who have been to blame, which he is now sensible of, and promises to do all things that may be for the benefit of the common cause.” And on the 30th, Sir Charles states:— “Upon the representation of the King of Portugal and the consideration of the misfortunes of the army there, Her Majesty has thought fit to recall Duke Schomberg.” Contemporary journals, however, state with great probability, that before those dates he wrote home and requested to be recalled, and his request was granted.

There were some who criticised his retirement rather severely. Burnet says:— “The Duke of Schomberg was a better officer in the field than in the cabinet; he did not know enough how to prepare for a campaign; he was both too inactive and too haughty.” Other writers do not blame him. One writes:— “The enemy’s successes gave no small uneasiness in England, and the Duke of Schomberg, finding his advice had not that weight it deserved with the Portuguese, was desirous to quit a losing game.” So another:— “Duke Schomberg being sick of his command in Portugal, where he found neither horses for mounting the confederate cavalry, nor anything else they had engaged to provide in order to enable the allies to enter upon action, and the Portuguese generals insisting on the command of the English and the Dutch, as well as their own troops, he desired to be recalled.” Marlborough wrote to him from the Camp of Weissenberg, 29th Sept. 1704:— “I must pray leave to assure you none can be more sensibly concerned than I am at the misrepresentations that have been made of your Grace from the Court of Portugal, whose slowness and ill-conduct hitherto do sufficiently justify the complaints you were obliged to make. I shall long to kiss your Grace’s hands in London.”

The Duke might well be discontented with the Portuguese, but why with the English Government? His experience convinced the latter that a general bigotted to precedents, etiquette, and routine, was not the man for the anxious emergency. Accordingly, the Earl of Portmore, Schomberg’s second in command, was allowed to come home too; and a different style of general was sent to Portugal, a man of diplomacy combined with military spirit, patience, and self-denial, Henri De Ruvigny, Earl of Galway. Lord Portmore considered it was a breach of faith to pass him over. Thus, both in the army and in general society a malcontent party was formed, to which Schomberg’s sullenness gave too much encouragement. One reason for his discontent appears in the Treasury Papers, which contain a memorial from the Duke of Schomberg to the Lord High Treasurer, asking for “his arrears due to him in the last war, during which time he was Commander-in-Chief of the forces of England. He was obliged to be the more pressing, by reason of the great expense he had been at for Her Majesty’s service in the expedition to Portugal.” To which there is added this official note, “''There is no fond provided by Parl$t.$ for this. See the former answers.''"

The occasions in which he is reported to have voted in the House of Lords were all connected with ecclesiastical subjects. In 1703 a Bill against Occasional Conformity was brought in (but did not pass), intended to exclude Dissenters from all Government employments. It was thought that Schomberg would have opposed such a bill. He allowed his proxy to be used in its favour, probably out of deference to his generalissimo, Prince George, who had a seat in the House of Lords, and who,