Research Subjects: Miscellaneous

Marking Waterloo

By Anthony Dawson

The victory of the Duke of Wellington over the Emperor Napoleon I on 18 June 1815 – and his subsequent removal from power – is an event, which is traditionally interpreted as bringing much rejoicing and thanksgivings for the end of a 25-year war. This would overlook the fact that Napoleon I, and the system he represented, had considerable support amongst the political and religious radicals groups – such as Unitarians and Methodists who did not and could not celebrate the downfall of their idol.

News of the victory at Waterloo arrived in London on Sunday 25 June 1815, by which point Napoleon had abdicated and Provisional Government formed. Wellington’s dispatches had travelled overland, carried by a Mr Lane. Lane had left Paris on 20 June, arriving at Boulogne on Saturday 24 and, whilst there, acquired copies of the Parisian papers (dated 20 and 21 June) which contained details of the French victories at Quatre Bras and Ligny. The Morning Chronicle announced the abdication of Napoleon on Monday 26 June.[1] The Morning Post, however, published details of Waterloo from the Moniteur (the French state newspaper) dated 22 June as well as particulars of the battle from the Belgian newspapers of 23 June.[2] News of the victory travelled fast – it reached Bury St. Edmunds on 28 June – and Edinburgh on the 29![3]

Prayers for Victory

The 7 July was proclaimed the day of National Thanksgiving for the victory at Waterloo. The Archbishop of Canterbury authorised a ' Form of Prayer and Thanksgiving to be Read in all Churches for the Glorious Victory Obtained over the French.' It ran as follows:

Oh God, the Disposer of all Human Events,without whose aid the strength of man is weakness, and the counsels of the wisest are as nothing, accept our praise and thanksgiving for the signal victory  which thouh has recently vouchafed to the Allied Armies in Flanders

Grant oh Merciful God that the results of this mighty battle, terrible in conflict, but glorious beyond example in sucess, may put an end to the miseries in Europe, and staunch the blood of the nations.

Bless, we beseach Thee, the Allied Armies with Thy continued Favour. Stretch forth Thy right hand to Guide and Protect Them. Let not the glory of their success be stained by ambition; nor sullied by revenge. But let thy Holy Spirit  support them in danger;  and raise them above all Temptation to do Evil, through Jesus Christ our Lord; to Whom, with Thee, and the Holy Ghost, be all  Honour and Glory, now and forever...

In Leeds, the bells at the Parish Church were rung whilst the Minister at Brunswick Chapel (Wesleyan) kept his doors firmly shut.The Minister at Mill Hill Chapel similarly kept his chapel closed but insead used his Sunday sermon to remind his congregation that God does not take sides in war, other than that of the peacemakers.

The Archbishop of Canterbury also authorised a 'Form of Prayer' for the wounded soldiers to be said on 13 August 1815 as well as allowing Parishes to collect funds for wound soldiers, widows and orhpans.

Philanthropy

Amidst the rejoicing, thoughts turned toward the dead and wounded of the battle. A ‘Great Patriotic Meeting’ was in London at the ‘City of London Tavern’ by the Merchants, Bankers ‘and others’ to ‘consider opening a Subscription for the relief of the Widows of those who fell in the Battle of Waterloo, or La Belle Alliance, and of the Wounded sufferers.’ The committee was to be known as the ‘City Committee’.  The Chair was taken by the banker, Mr Alexander Baring, who noted that it was the ‘duty of the Government’ to take care of those who had died or fallen in its service, the lot often fell to ‘private benevolence’ to provide such aid. The banker, Fuller, opened the subscription by promising the sum of 200 guineas and hoped that ‘gentlemen of bond-street would lay off buying baubles and nonsense, and a pack of fooleries’ and urged them instead to ‘spend their money more laudably’ – not only for the good of their fellow-men but also their soul. The meeting ended with £500 having been subscribed.[4][4] In Edinburgh a similar subscription was opened, headed by Sir Walter Scott, chaired by the Solicitor General. Subscriptions could be left at Lloyd’s. At the same date, the Highland Society of Scotland elected the Duke of Wellington as an Honorary Member – as was Field Marshal Blucher![5]  A meeting of the ‘Noblemen and Gentry’ of London was held on 11 July at the Thatched House Tavern, St James, chaired by the Duke of York, to organise a subscription for the widows and orphans of Waterloo (The Westminster Committee). Amongst those present was Dr Gurney (Rector of St Clements Danes); William Wilberforce MP and the Bishop of London. The subscription had originally been for British soldiers only, but at the suggestion of Mr Wilberforce Hanoverians, Belgians and the ‘German Legion’ were to be included. To this end, he  proposed a meeting be held with the ‘City Committee’ regarding the ‘propriety of applying the some proportion of the Subscriptions to the Prussian sufferers.’ The Bishop of London, however, stated that Anglican Parishes ‘could do nothing’ until such an endeavour had been sanctioned by either a Royal Letter or the Archbishop of Canterbury as each church would be raising money for something other than parochial purposes.[6] The Officers, NCOs and Men of the 1st Battalion Coldstream Guards, reported The Morning Post, all voted a days pay to go to the relief of the widows and orphans of the battle.[7] The issue of whether moneys raised in Anglican parishes could be used for non-parochial activities and in the support of non-Anglicans or British subjects rumbled on for several months. At a meeting in September 1815 the Archbishop of Canterbury ‘did not conclude’ that aid should be given to the Prussians – ‘The first Object to us was, and ought to be, to relieve the British. They had no other quarter to look to.’ Furthermore, the committees had to be careful to ensure moneys were given to deserving members of the National Church (!). Mr Ravencroft in reply, however, stated that moneys raised by ‘the Prince Regent’s letters’ in Anglican parishes was for Allied soldiers whilst the collection made by the Scottish Kirk was for British soldiers as well. He further stated that ‘British’ in this context meant any soldier ‘all in Line under the Duke of Wellington’ which therefore included British, Hanoverian and Dutch-Belgian officers and men but not Prussians.[8]

A similar subscription list was to be opened in Lancaster – at the suggestion of ‘A fiddler’ – in aid of the ‘London Fund, for the relief and benefit of the sufferers of the battle of Waterloo.’[9] The manager of the Lancaster Theatre donated half of his receipts - £16 10s  - from the performance of 7 July to the City Committee where it was received with ‘grateful thanks.’ [10]  The final sum raised in Lancaster and surrounding towns was £703 13s 8d. A similar list was opened in York, which by 22 July had raised £851 5s,[11] whilst the Liverpool committee had raised £3,701 12s 6d![12] A month later the money raised in Liverpool amounted to over £5,000.[13]

The Parish of Hunslet (Leeds) raised £17 and the employees of Messrs. Fisher, Nixon & Co. of Holbeck (Leeds) subscribed £8 8s.[14] The sum raised by the Parish of Leeds by late August 1815 stood at £1,784 9s 12d; the Parish of Holbeck had subscribed nearly £100; Harewood £101 9s 7d; Bramley upwards of £20 and ‘Officers and men employed on the Recruiting Service in the Leeds District donated a days’ pay which came to a total of £25 11s.[15] The Parish of Wakefield subscribed £490 and the Parish of Horbury £10 3s 9d and Normanton £29 17s 4d.[16]

‘A Gentlemen who was about to proceed to Brussels’ advertised in the Metropolitan ‘papers that he would take letters sent by the families of wounded officers with him and ‘communicate their reply, on his return’ which would be in about ten days. [17]

Waterloo in the West End.

A performance of ‘Julius Caesar’s Triumph over the Gauls’ was staged at the Royal Opera House, London ‘for the benefit of the Distressed Families of those who have fallen.’ It was expected to be ‘splendid in the extreme.’[18] By special permission of the Prince Regent, ‘Beethoven’s battle piece’ was allowed to be played, conducted by Sir George Smart.[19]

The King’s Theatre staged a similar  ‘Grand Performance’ for the ‘Benefit of the Distressed Widows and Children of those Soldiers who have so bravely and gloriously fallen’ on 6 July 1815.[20] Sadler’s Wells Theatre on 27 June presented ‘Waterloo or Wellington Forever (newly written) sung by Mr Sloane.[21]

The Radical, William Cobbett, whilst deploring both the battle of Waterloo and the defeat of Napoleon, hoped that helping the widows, orphans and wounded from the battle would unite Britons in common humanity. He believed the battle revealed man’s inhumanity and should be used as the prime example of why war could never be sanction by any moral country. He stated: ‘the Battle of Waterloo should never have been provoked’ and that it was a battle of ‘national liberty’ against an invading foreign power. He further believed that the cost of supporting the wound and widows from the battle should be entirely borne by the government – after all they were soldiers of the crown, expected to be killed and wounded in its service so therefore the crown should be liable to support them.[22]

Picturing the Battle

The enterprising Bell’s Weekly Messenger had a souvenir map of the battle produced  ‘correctly illustrate…[with] Official Accounts. It will be accompanied by Original Details, explanatory of the means by which this great victory was obtained…’[23]Smith of London published an engraving and account of the battle ‘drawn under the direction of a General Officer of distinction’[24] Mr Heaphy of London advertised a large collection of portraits ‘of the Generals and officers who have distinguished themselves’ in the battle which were on view daily at No. 1 Park Row, Marylebone. He also proposed to produce a ‘Grand National Print’ of the battle (measuring 34 inches by 22 inches) costing 10 guineas (colour) and 6 guineas black and white.[25] Similarly, Messrs. Boydell of St James’ Street, London, also produced a colour engraving of the battle, drawn by ‘Mr Atkinson’ and dedicated to the Prince Regent which sold for as much as £1 for the colour version.[26]

The Adelphi Gallery in London staged an exhibition of paintings of Napoleon, the centrepiece of which was the ‘Painting of Bonaparte by Robert Lefevre’. It closed at the end of July before going on tour in the provinces.[27]

Curiosities and Tourists

An advert in The Morning Post 23 August 1815 not only offered tours to the ‘Field of Waterloo’ but also s ‘Waterloo Relics’; a Mr Peat, Saddler of Piccadilly, London had for sale "A Cuirass, Complete, of a French Gens d'Armes slain at Waterloo; also a beautiful brazen one, taken from an officer in the Imperial Guards. The have both been collected off the plain of Waterloo by a Gentleman just arrived and will probably be the last imported into this Country, the Belgian Government laying severe penalties on the expedition of any object from that place.’

The ‘Waterloo Museum’ was established at number 97, Pall-Mall, London  (formerly the Star & Garter Tavern) by Mr Palmer.  It was opened 17 November 1815, and it was staffed by retired soldiers or those ‘gallant young men who were actually deprived of their limbs in that ever-memorable conflict.’[28] It was open daily and other than ‘Waterloo relics’ was to be seen a large mural of the battle by a ‘Flemish painter’. It had been ‘lately very considerably enlarged’ in November 1815 and the proprietor was keen to advertise that ‘good fires are kept.’[29] The first room entered was the ‘Cuirassiers’ Hall’: ‘The walls are entirely lined with cuirasses, helmets, swords guns and bayonets; the whole picked up on the field of battle.’ There was a mannequin of Prince Murat and over the mantle a copy of the painting of Napoleon by Lefevre.[30] Also on display were mannequins of the Empress Marie Louise and a depiction of the entry of the Allies in Paris. The sword presented by the City of Paris to Napoleon was also on display.[31] In the next room was ‘the stove which once stood in Bonaparte’s  closet at St Cloud’; the Mameluke Roustam’s sword; the ‘state mantle of Joseph’ and ‘Military Standards of the Empire.’[32] The third room housed ‘Bonaparte’s state saddle and its hangings’, [33] whilst the Coronation Robes of Napoleon and Josephine were on display in the final saloon.[34]

By permission – and patronage of the Prince Regent – the  ‘Coronation Robe and Mantle of Bonaparte’ together with the crown, sceptre and ‘other treasures’ were on display Monsieur Tousaud’s, 33 Coventry Street, London. Admittance was by invitation only, between 10am and 10pm. Also on display were ‘Waterloo Cuirasses, Swords, Eagles, Ball &c..’.[35] A ‘representation of the field of Waterloo the day after the battle’ was on display at Covent Garden, but it ‘did not meet…expectation’ due to the topography being, perhaps, exaggerated and ‘in the absence of killed and wounded amidst scattered guns and broken carriages.’ It was however, both ‘artistical’ and ‘tasteful,’ proving very popular with visitors.[36]

James Howe commissioned a large mural depicting the battle of Waterloo – visitors stood in the centre of an oval room and had the battle unfold around them.  The mural was based on drawings by ‘Mr Howe on the spot’. It proved incredibly popular and went on tour – being advertised in Edinburgh in October 1815. It was the only ‘correct view’ of the battle, ‘with every particular circumstance of the battle as recorded by him on the spot, from the principle officers, both British and Foreign, who were in the battle.’ At 40 Princes Street, Edinburgh, was second large piece of public art – this time depicting St Helena including a ‘celebrated portrait of Napoleon.’ Admittance was one shilling.[37]

Dark side of Victory: Murder of Protestants

The Minister of Mill Hill Unitarian Chapel in Leeds, Rev. Thomas Jarvis, used his Sermons to warn his congregation about the murder of French Protestants at the hands of Catholics and the destruction of Protestant churches and theft of their property. He laid the blame at the feet of Louis XVIII. Whilst the Royal Charter established religious freedom, he believed Louis and the Bourbon government were turning a blind eye to the atrocities in the Vendée or Brittany and had a ‘particular guilt in the murders already committed.’ Neither the King, his ministers or the Bishops had acted to stop the murders and therefore were complicit in them; the Reverend believed that the King could not intervene because he was ‘devoted to the interests of the Catholic church’ and ‘much embued [sic]’ with its superstition. He urged all ‘enlightened men’ to rally against the Bourbons and their supporters in Britain to ‘rescue the civil and religions liberties of mankind’.[38]  The Liberal Leeds Mercury agreed describing France as sinking into a state of anarchy, and whilst it could not condone foreign powers intervening in those of another state, it urged intervention by other Protestant powers to save religious and civil freedom in France.[39] The York Herald upheld a similar view but also believed that the French press was ‘becoming more servile’ than it had been under Napoleon and furthermore reactionary powers in Britain were using the events in France to support their own attacks on religious minorities. The ‘Allied Sovereigns’, however, had a duty to restore to all French people their civil and religious liberties, which had been granted to them under Napoleon but were being denied to them under the King.[40] The Radical William Cobbett believed the treatment of French protestants by the Catholic mob with the tacit support of the Bourbons, meant the ‘extinction’ of the French monarchical system: the Bourbons were perpetrating on France ‘excesses more severe’ than those of the Jacobins and their supporters in Britain were ‘deluded’ as to the actual state of France or the political ambition of the Bourbons.[41]

The Unitarian Minister, Rev. Robert Aspland, wrote on 7 July 1815 (The Day of General Thanksgiving for the late Victory of the Duke of Wellington) :

This is the thanksgiving day (for the defeat of Bounaparte), but I feel no gratitude for it, and can express none, for the shedding of blood, and the creating of widows and orphans. When on various occasions the supreme authority of the nation invited the people to fast and pray for our success of our fleets and armies, we found ourselves unable to comply with the request; for we worship not the God of Great Britain merely; but the God of the whole Earth, and we should have feared the Divine rebuke by the mouth of the Prince of Peace, the Lord of Life, if we had dared to implore from Heaven the destruction of our fellow-creatures. Here the command of God and Man seemed to be at variance, and we thought it right, tho’ to suffer the anger and torment of the mob, acting under the responsibility of our Christian character, to obey God, rather than man. .

Whilst welcoming the Peace, Aspland - together with Belsham - deplored the Peace Treaty as it re-imposed Catholicism on France and re-introduced Slavery.

Aspland notes that as a Dissenter he did not have to obey any proclamation from the King or Canterbury regarding religion. Thus his, and many other Dissenting chapels were closed and had their windows boarded up. In his Journal that he put a few penny candles in his windows to give the impression he was taking part in the ‘Great Illumination’ so that the revellers/mob in he street wouldn't brand him disloyal (as had happened on previous occasions).

The Unitarian and Humanist William Hazlitt – who had been a vociferous supporter of Napoleon – was left dazed and shocked after the battle. He was ‘…staggering under the Blow of Waterloo. The reappearance of our Imperial Idol on the coast of France, and his triumphal march on Paris is like a fairy-vision, excited our admiration and sympathy to their utmost pitch...Waterloo... the greatest and most fatal in its consequence that was ever fought in the world...the Sun that illuminated the Day of Austerlitz has finally set; the Lamp of Liberty is extinguished.’

One Dissenter writing to the Examiner believed that the treatment of French Protestant was not too dissimilar to the treatment of Dissenters during the Napoleonic Wars and the violence against French Protestants was evidence alone to remove many of the ‘injuries’ levelled against British Dissenters and argue for Disestablishment. The Anglican Church was corrupt; its ‘college oaths and ecclesiastical subscriptions’ opened the ‘door’ to ‘preferment’ by state and, by extension, the Church and those who did not agree with it or its formularies were ‘damn[ed] to the eternal torments of Hell’. Another correspondent, however, drew the opposite conclusion -  Dissenters against the Church were dissenters against the King (not only that: their immortal soul was in danger) and should be routed out.[42]

The congregation of Mill Hall, Chapel, Leeds raised £20 for ‘the Relief of Suffering Protestants in France’. The Leeds Mercury could not praise highly enough the ‘public act of benevolence’ and drew negative parallels between the ‘Ladies of Leeds’ and the ‘barbarities committed by those Women of Nismes’ against Protestant men. The congregation of Albion Chapel, Leeds, held a similar collection; so too did the Unitarians of Sheffield who raised £21 3s 3d. The Tory, Anglican, Leeds Intelligencier, however, described the collections as treasonous and the French Protestants as ‘crest-fallen Bonapartists.’ [43] London Unitarians also made a collection.[44] The Leeds Mercury called the atrocities pre-meditated and the prelude to further and bloodier conflict in France – on religious rather than political lines,[45] whilst other newspapers carried gory reports of the murder or rape of French Protestants.[46] The ‘Protestant Dissenting Ministers of London’, chaired by Rev. Dr. Taylor and under the patronage of William Smith MP organised a national petition to raise funds to ‘alleviate the suffering’ of French Protestants; to maintain the cause of French Protestanism and provide shelter for refugees. William Smith expressed his ‘horror’ at the events in France and that the British government had effectively washed its hands of the matter.[47] The Morning Chronicle implicated Louis XVIII and especially the Duc d’Angouleme for the atrocities carried out against Protestants: ‘Let us hear no more of conciliatory measures’ it thundered whilst the Bourbons took no measures to ‘even indicate [their] disapprobation of the persecution of Protestants.’[48]

Rev. Jarvis of Leeds again used his Sermons to condemn the Bourbons and their supporters in the British Parliament. Thursday 18 January 1816 was the ‘Day Appointed for General Thanksgiving on the conclusion of a General Peace’: Jarvis, rather like Rev. Aspland urged his congregation that God did not take sides during war and that it was immoral and un-Christian to pray for the death and wounding of fellow human beings. ‘God is the author of peace’ and to act in a warlike way was to act contrarily to the will of God.[49] The Unitarian Minister, Rev. William Turner of Newcastle addressed a Public Meeting to urge the Government into action to defend French Protestants; to stop France falling into anarchy and to raise funds to alleviate their suffering.[50] The Duke of Wellington wrote a letter to the ‘Protestant Society for the Protection of Religious Liberty’ in order to express his and the Governments view, in which he described the unrest as ‘ perfectly natural’ and that all those reports of atrocities committed against Protestants were misinformed: the King was doing all he could to protect all his subjects and he was not to blame for the ‘unfortunate circumstances which have occurred.’[51]The Morning Post condemned the letter and its high-handed tone, believing it was the Duke who was mistaken, not the Protestants of Britain;[52] the joint secretary of the ‘Protestant Society…’  (Thomas Pellatt and John Wilks) were filled with ‘astonishment’ and ‘regret’ at the Dukes’ letter and the light in which he cast their society and its supporters, implying that their support for French Protestants was support for former Bonapartists.[53] By January 1816 branches of the ‘Protestant Society’ had appeared in Leeds, York, Hull, Newcastle, Edinburgh and Glasgow. Each had support from across the Protestant spectrum and had delivered petitions to the Houses of Parliament demanding British intervention – with force of arms if necessary – to stop the persecution of French Protestants.[54]

The Committee of Dissenting Ministers sent the Rev. Clement Perrot (1789-1849) to make a ‘special visit to France’ for the ‘purpose of obtaining the truth or falsehood of the various reports of persecution which have reached this country.’   Perrot was an Independent, born in Jersey and was the great-grandson of a Huguenot. He was subsequently Principal of the Independent College in Rotherham. His report ‘found these accounts fully confirmed’ and therefore the Committee moved to pass several resolutions  - not least censuring Wellington – and condemned both the French and British governments for not attempting to prevent the attacks on French Protestants.[55] Perrot’s report was subsequently published by Longman of London, and was available at 2s 6d. The Committee of Dissenting Ministers also organised a collection of books and clothes for French Protestants. Subscription lists were opened at various London banks and the Committee appealed to landlords to provide accommodation for French refugees.[56]

The Rev. S Wood – based on his travels in the South of France – stated that French Protestants were Arians and thus attacks on them were all the more violent.[57] The Unitarian Press further noted French Protestants were being find for their belief and even taken to court for refusing to take part in the Mass or ‘decorate their houses with idolatrous hangings’ on holy days. Unitarians were also keen to argue that those Protestants taken to court were done so under Civil rather than Ecclesiastical Law; further proof in favour of Disestablishment in Britain. The matter finally came to the French court in 1818 when Odillon Barrot defended the Deacon of the Protestant Church in Bordeaux and had his conviction over-turned on the grounds that Roman Catholicism since 1801 was not the state religion – not matter what the Bourbons might think! The State was separate from the Church: the State could not rule on Church matters and vice versa and could not therefore ‘associate itself with the ceremonies and formularies of any one particular worship.’[58] It was not just the French who were trying to revoke religious freedoms, but the Austrians too. The returned King Ferdinand, with the backing of Austrian, declared Protestantism illegal – a heresy no less – and thus the Protestant Churches, which had been built in Naples under the rule of Murat, were all closed and forceful conversions made.[59] In London the ‘Protestant Society for the Protection of Religious Liberty’ tried to garner public support to protect French Protestants and to urge the Government into action to ‘pass some effective measures to terminate the disgraceful proceedings’ in France.[60]

Placed on the Napoleon Series: January 2015

Notes:

[1] ‘Abdication of Bonaparte’, The Morning Chronicle (26 June 1815).

[2] ‘Bonaparte Acknowledgement of his complete defeat, and his reported arrival in Paris’, The Morning Post (26 June 1815).

[3] ‘Tuesdays Post: Further Important News’, The Bury and Norwich Post (28 June 1815); ‘Edinburgh News’, The Caledonian Mercury (29 June 1815).

[4] ‘Great Patriotic Meeting’, The Morning Post (29 June 1815).

[5] ‘The Highland Society’, Caledonian Mercury (10 July 1815); ‘The Battle of Waterloo’, Caledonian Mercury (10 July 1815).

[6] ‘Battle of Waterloo’, The Morning Chronicle (12 July 1815).

[7] ‘Battle of Waterloo’, The Morning Post (12 July 1815).

[8] ‘Waterloo Fund’, The Morning Post (12 September 1815).

[9] ‘The Battle of Waterloo’, The Lancaster Gazette (15 July 1815).

[10] ‘Waterloo Subscription’, The Lancaster Gazette (22 July 1815).

[11] ‘City of York. General Subscription for the Relief of families…’, The York Herald (22 July 1815).

[12] ‘Waterloo Subscription’, The Liverpool  Mercury (28 July 1815).

[13] ‘Waterloo Subscription’, The Liverpool Mercury (25 August 1815).

[14] ‘Leeds’, Leeds Mercury (29 July 1815).

[15] ‘Subscriptions’, Leeds Mercury (26 August 1815).

[16] ‘Waterloo Subscription’, Leeds Mercury (2 September 1815).

[17] ‘To the friends of Brave Officers’, The Morning Post (1 July 1815).

[18] ‘To the editor, the Morning Post’, The Morning Post (1 July 1815).

[19] ‘Theatre Royal’, The Morning Post (29 June 1815).

[20] ‘The King’s Theatre’, The Morning Post (27 June 1815).

[21] ‘Sadler’s Wells. This evenng’, The Morning Post (27 June 1815).

[22] ‘The Waterloo Subscription’, Cobbett’s Weekly Political Register (5 August 1815).

[23] ‘Classified Advertisements. The Battle of Waterloo’, The Morning Post (1 July 1815).

[24] ‘Published this Day’.The Morning Post (22 August 1815).

[25] ‘Classified Advertisements: Battle of Waterloo’, The Morning Post (24 August 1815).

[26] ‘Battle of Waterloo’, The Morning Post (28 August 1815).

[27] ‘Bonaparte- the Adelphi Exhibition’, The Morning Post (July 1 1815).

[28] ‘The Waterloo Museum’, The Morning Post (18 November 1815).

[29] ‘The Waterloo Museum’, The Morning Post (30 November 1815).

[30] ‘The Waterloo  Museum’, The Morning Post (18 November 1815).

[31] Ibid.

[32] ‘The Waterloo Museum’, The Morning Post (4 December 1815).

[33] ‘The Waterloo Museum’, The Morning Post (8 December 1815).

[34] ‘The Waterloo Museum’, The Morning Post (6 January 1815).

[35] ‘The Exhibition of Imperial  Coronation Robes’, The Morning Post (27 November 1815).

[36] ‘Covent Garden’, The Morning Post (27 December 1815).

[37] ‘Classified Advertisements’, The Caledonian Mercury (28 October 1815).

[38] ‘The Mercury’, Leeds Mercury (2 September 1815).

[39] Ibid.

[40] ‘The Herald’, The York Herald (2 September 1815).

[41] ‘Political Delusion’, Cobbett’s Weekly Political Register (16 September 1815).

[42] ‘The Dissenters’, The Examiner (17 September 1815); ‘The Dissenters’, The Examiner (8 October 1815).

[43] ‘Leeds’, The Leeds Mercury (13 January 1816).

[44] ‘The Morning Chronicle’, The Morning Chronicle (17 January 1816).

[45] ‘French Protestants’, The Leeds Mercury (25 November 1815).

[46] ‘French Protestants’, The Hull Packet (28 November 1815); ‘Protestants in France’, The Morning  Post (30 November 1815); ‘The French Protestants’, The Liverpool Mercury (1 December 1815).

[47] ‘French Protestants’, The Leeds Mercury (2 December 1815).

[48] ‘The Morning Chronicle’, The Morning Chronicle (8 December 1815).

[49] ‘Unitarian Chapel, Leeds’, The Leeds Mercury (2 March 1816).

[50] ‘Newcastle Meeting’, The Morning Chronicle (3 January 1816).

[51] ‘French Protestants. Letter from the Duke of Wellington ‘, The Morning Post (8 January 1816).

[52] ‘The French Protestants’, The Morning Post (8 January 1816);

[53] ‘French Protestants: To the Editor’, The Morning Post (9 January 1816).

[54] ‘Glasgow Meeting: Persecution of Protestants in France’, The Morning Chronicle (9 January 1816); ‘Religious Persecution’, The Morning Post (10 January 1816).

[55] ‘French Protestants’, The Leeds Mercury (18 May 1816).

[56] ‘The Report Onto the Persecution of French Protestants’, The Morning Post (1 June 1816).

[57] ‘Intelligence’, The Unitarian Advocate,vol. 1-2, pp. 267-268.

[58] ‘Important Decision in favour of Religious Liberty in France’, The Monthly Repository of Theology and General Literature, vol. 13 (1818), pp. 780-781.

[59] ‘Intelligence. Naples’, The Monthly Repository of Theology and General Literature, vol. 10 (1815)  p. 592.

[60] ‘The Morning Post’, The Morning Post (24 November 1815).



© Copyright 1995-2017, The Napoleon Series, All Rights Reserved.