Napoleon Series Archive 2011

Dupont's 'trial'

I've cheated and started reading the Titeux at the third volume; I had always understood that Dupont had been hard-done by but I hadn't realised how outrageous the matter was.

It is easy to see why Napoleon would have lost his temper when he got the news of the capitulation of Baylen (July 1808) but it is usually suggested that he was OK once he cooled down and in this case he kept up the animosity for over three years! Dupont & his four co-accused were held in prison without trial apparently because it seemed likely any legal trial would acquit them (not having committed any known offence) until finally (not till the spring of 1812) a commission of high officials was formed to 'advise' on the matter. The accused were allowed to make statements and to be confronted with each other but they had no legal defence or right to call witnesses and, it would seem from the judgements, the members of the court accepted the statement as given by the prosecutor, only varying in their assessements of the degree of guilt of the minor players.

There were three marshals, Moncey, Bessieres and Berthier, on the panel as well as Clarke, the minister of war - you might have thought one of them could have stood up for an old comrade - apart from anything else they were setting an awfully dangerous precedent - but none of them made a murmur of dissent.*

Some of the accused were recommended to the Imperial mercy but not only were they all punished by degradation and dismissal but Dupont at least was imprisoned indefinitely which was Napoleon's own addition to the punishment.

Even if Dupont had mishandled the campaign and capitulation (which Titeux would not accept) this seems an excessive reaction - Junot was not punished for the Convention of Cintra - it just seems like a massive Imperial tantrum and it is hard to see why he pursued the business so vindictively, he could have just dismissed the officers from the army if he wanted to make his disapproval clear.

Susan
*According to Dupont, when Berthier came to apologise in 1814 the only explanation he could give was "you know what he was like"!

Messages In This Thread

Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Encouraging the others
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Guerre D'Espagne: Capitualtion De Baylen, Causes E
Re: Guerre D'Espagne: Capitualtion De Baylen, Caus
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Mme Moreau
Re: Mme Moreau
Re: Mme Moreau
Re: Mme Moreau
Re: Mme Moreau
Moreau's just deserts ...
Re: Moreau's just deserves
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Re: Cintra comparison
Maybe a la St. Clair in Ohio in 1791 *NM*
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: On the battlefield, Sir, one fights
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Re: Dupont's 'trial'
Another book of interest