NAPOLEON'S LIEUTENANTS

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 154, 29 June 1912, Page 20

NAPOLEON'S LIEUTENANTS

i\HSTAKES AT WATERLOO. Napoleon's choice of lieutenants in tht> Waterloo campaign is keenly criticised iv Dr. Holland Rose's latest volume, "Pitt and Napoleon." The detachment of Grouchy's corps L> also condemned, as it has been by most military historians. If the purpose v.-as to guard his right flank, Grouchy could have accomplished that object much better by never leaving the Emperor'e eide. With Grouchy in lino, Wollington, it is argued, would have been crushed at Waterloo long before tho Prussians could have intervened. This was the principal cause of Napoloon'a defeat, but there were other contributory ones. " Napoleon made a poor choice of lieutenants to assist him in Belgium. He left tho mighty Davoust in Par if — the marshal who, by temperament and skill, was better fitted to meet Wellington than any other, and to whom h» should havo given Key's command. - Had Sucbet been in Grcuchy's place, on© can hardly imagine him failing to march on Waterloo, after acareful consideration cf th? strategical position ; and, at any rate, ho would never hay* wasted valuable hours bitting in a farmhouse at Walham, e'ting strawberries, with the sound of the guns at Waterloo in his ears, trying to decide whether to march on Namur, or on Waterloo. Another factor which told heavily against the Emperor wara the absence of 13erthi«r, as chief of his staff, for the first time in almost twenty years of incessant warfare. 'Dr. l-toee points j out how little Napoleon actually had to do with the direction of the operationo against tho English after the failure of D'Ei'lon's onset. He then left the conduct of the attack to Ney, and ho himtell wont to Planchenoit, to protect his right flank agaiuet the attack of Bulow'o corps.