THE GENERAL MILITARY SITUATION
In order to understand what happened at the Battle of Tourcoing, it is
first necessary to have in mind the general situation of the forces which
opposed each other round and about what is now the Franco-Belgian
frontier, in the spring of 1794.
These forces were, of course, those of the French Republic upon the one
hand, upon the other the coalition with its varied troops furnished by
Austria, by Prussia, by England, and some few by sundry of the small
States which formed part of the general alliance for the destruction of
the new democracy.
The whole campaign of 1794 stands apart from that of 1793. The intervening
winter was a period during which, if we disregard a number of small
actions in which the French took the offensive, nothing of moment was
done upon either side, and we must begin our study with the preparations,
originating in the month of February, for the active efforts which it was
proposed to attempt when the spring should break.
In that month of February, Mack, recently promoted to the rank of
Major-General in the Austrian army, met the Duke of York, the young
soldier son of George III., in London, to concert the common plan. It was
upon the 12th of that month that this meeting took place. Mack brought the
news to the British Cabinet that the Emperor of Austria, his master, was
prepared to act as Commander-in-Chief of the allied army in the coming
campaign, proposed a general plan of advancing from the Belgian frontier
upon Paris after the capture of the frontier fortresses, and negotiated
for the largest possible British contingent.
Coburg, it was arranged, should be the General in practical command (under
the nominal headship of the Emperor). Prussian troops, in excess of the
twenty thousand which Prussia owed as a member of the Empire, were
obtained upon the promise of a large subsidy from England and Holland, and
with the month of April some 120,000 men were holding the line from Treves
to the sea. This passed through and occupied Dinant, Bavai, Valenciennes,
St Amand, Denain, Tournai, Ypres, and Nieuport. To this number must be
added men in the garrisons, perhaps some 40,000 more. Of this long line
the strength lay in the centre.
The central army, under the general command of Coburg, who had his
headquarters at Valenciennes, was, if we exclude men in garrisons,
somewhat over 65,000 in strength, or more than half the whole strength of
the long line. With Coburg in the central army was the Duke of York with
some 22,000, and the Prince of Orange with a rather smaller contingent of
Dutch.
Over against this long line with its heavy central "knot" or bulk of men
under Coburg, in the neighbourhood of Valenciennes, the genius of Carnot
had mustered over 200,000 French troops, which, when we have deducted
various items for garrisons and other services, counted as effective more
than 150,000 but less than 160,000 men. This French line extended from the
sea to Maubeuge, passing through Dunquerque, Cassel, Lille, Cambrai, and
Bouchain.
It was as a fact a little before the opening of April that the French
began the campaign by taking the offensive on a large scale upon the
29th of March.
[Illustration: SKETCH MAP SHOWING THE OPPOSING FRENCH AND ALLIED LINES.
APRIL 1794]
Pichegru, who was in command of that frontier army, attacked, with 30,000
men, the positions of the allies near Le Cateau, well to the right or
south-east of their centre and his, and was beaten back.
It was upon the 14th of April that the Emperor of Austria joined Coburg at
Valenciennes, held a review of his troops (including the British
contingent, which will be given later in detail), fixed his headquarters
in the French town of Le Cateau, and at once proceeded to the first
operation of the campaign, which was the siege of the stronghold of
Landrecies. The Dutch contingent of the allies drove in the French
outposts and carried the main French position in front of the town within
that week. By the 22nd of April the garrison of Landrecies was contained,
the beleaguering troops had encircled it, and the siege was begun.
After certain actions (most of them partial, and one of peculiar
brilliance in the history of the British cavalry), actions each of
interest, and some upon a considerable scale, but serving only to confuse
the reader if they were here detailed, Landrecies fell after eight days'
siege, upon the 30th of April. An advance of the Austrian centre, after
this success, was naturally expected by the French.
That normal development of the campaign did not take place on account of a
curious episode in the strategy of this moment to which I beg the reader
to give a peculiar attention. It is necessary to grasp exactly the nature
of that episode, for it determined all that was to follow.
While the fate of Landrecies still hung in the balance, and before the
surrender of the town, Pichegru had, in another part of the long line,
scored one of those successes which in any game or struggle are worse than
losing a trick or suffering a defeat. It was one of those successes in
which one gets the better of one's opponent in one chance part of the
general contest, but so triumphs without a set plan, with no calculation
upon what should follow upon the achievement, and therefore with every
prospect of finding oneself in a worse posture after it than before.
To take an analogy from chess: Pichegru's error, which I will presently
describe, might be compared to the action of a player who, taking a castle
of his opponent's with his queen, thereby leaves his king unguarded and
open to check-mate.
Wherever men are opposed one to the other in lines, each line having the
mission to advance against the other, it is a fatal move to get what
footballers call "'fore side": to let a portion of your forces advance too
far from the general line held by the whole, and to have the advanced part
of that portion thus isolated from the support of its fellows. Such a
formation invites a concentration of your opponents against the isolated
body, and may lead to its destruction.
It was precisely in this position that Pichegru placed a portion of his
forces by the ill-advised advance he made down the valley of the Lys to
Courtrai.
Taking advantage of the way in which the main forces of the allies were
tied to the siege of Landrecies, the French commander wisely moved forward
the whole of his forces to the north and west, pushing the enemy back
before him to the line Ypres-Menin, and besieging Menin itself. But most
unwisely he not only permitted to advance, but himself directed and led, a
body of 30,000 men (the command of General Souham) far forward of this
general movement: he actually carried it on as far as the town of
Courtrai.
The accompanying sketch map shows how much too far advanced this wedge
of men (so large a contingent to imperil by isolation!) was beyond the
general line, and, to repeat the phrase I have just used, a metaphor which
best expresses my meaning, Souham and his division, by Pichegru's direct
orders, had got "'fore side."
[Illustration]
The only excuse that can be pleaded for Pichegru's folly in this matter,
was the temptation presented by the weak garrison of Courtrai, and the
bait which a facile temporary success always holds out for a man who has
formed no consistent general plan. But that very excuse is the strongest
condemnation of the inexcusable error, and this strategical fault of
Pichegru's was soon paid for by the imperilling of all the great body of
French troops within that rashly projected triangle.
For the moment Pichegru may have foolishly congratulated himself that he
had done something of military value, as he had certainly done something
striking. Menin fell to the French on the same day that Landrecies did to
the Austrians, and this further success doubtless tempted him to remain
with the head of his wedge at Courtrai, when every consideration of
strategy should have prompted him to retrace his steps and to recall the
over-advanced division back into line.
This isolated position down the valley of the Lys, this wedge thrust out
in front of Lille, positively asked the allies to attack it.
The enemy was a fortnight developing his plan, but his delay was equalled
by Pichegru's determination to hold the advanced post he had captured; and
when the allies did finally close in upon that advanced post, nothing but
a series of accidents, which we shall follow in detail when we come to the
story of the action, saved Souham from annihilation. And the destruction
of Souham's division, considering its numbers and its central position,
might have involved the whole French line in a general defeat.
As I have said, it was at the end of April that this false success of
Pichegru's was achieved, and a whole fortnight was to elapse before the
allies concentrated to take advantage of that error, and to cut off
Souham's division.
That fortnight was full of minor actions, not a few of them interesting to
the student of military history, and one again remarkable as a feat of
English horse. I deliberately omit all mention of these lest I should
confuse the reader and disturb his conception of the great battle that
was to follow.
That battle proceeded upon a certain plan thought out in detail, perfectly
simple in character, and united in conception. It failed, as we shall see;
and by its failure turned what should have been the cutting-off and
destruction of Souham's command into a signal French victory. But before
we can understand the causes of its failure, we must grasp the plan itself
in its major lines, and with that object I shall discuss it in my next
section under the title of "The Plan of the Allies."