Napoleon Series Archive 2014

Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
In Response To: Proof advanced by Roberts ()

Further evidence of direct British government involvement in the 1804 plot to murder Napoleon lies in several letters, the first written on June 22, 1803, from a Mr Walter Spencer to Lord Castlereagh, a senior British cabinet minister, asking for the repayment of £ 150 for himself and £ 1,000 for Michelle de Bonneuil, a royalist plotter with several identities who is known to have met Louis XVIII’s brother the Comte d’Artois (the future King Charles X) in Edinburgh during the Amiens peace. Spencer said the money had been advanced ‘relative to a political intrigue planned by Lord Castlereagh to abduct Bonaparte in 1803’, which was co-ordinated by Mr Liston, the British envoy to The Hague (38) (Plots to ‘abduct’ Napoleon at this time were transparent covers for his assassination.) Although there is nothing directly incriminating from the government side in the exchange – as might be expected – George Holford, a member of parliament who was Castlereagh’s closest friend in politics, wrote to Spencer saying that if he would ‘take the trouble of calling in Downing Street his Lordship will see him upon it’. This would hardly have been the case if Spencer had been a crank.

38-NYPL Napoleon I folder 1

Is that all????

So there is no letter or an specific written order where Castlerreagh is specific mentioning that Bonaparte has to be assasinated and that the money is used for such an attmept??

Messages In This Thread

State Sponsored Terrorism
Assasination - yes or no?
Re: Assasination - yes or no?
Re: Assasination - yes or no?
Definition
Re: Definition
Re: Definition
Re: Definition
Re: Assasination - yes or no?
Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts *LINK*
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Proof advanced by Roberts
Re: Mme Bonneuil
Byron on Castlereagh: Cold-blooded miscreant
Re: Byron on Castlereagh: Cold-blooded miscreant