Captain Gillespie and the 58 Anglophiles of Buenos Aires in 1806

Author(s): H. V. Livermore
Source: The Hispanic American Historical Review , Feb., 1980, Vol. 60, No. 1 (Feb., 1980),
pp. 69-78
Published by: Duke University Press

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.com/stable/2513893

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Duke University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Hispanic American Historical Review

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Hispanic American Historical Review
60(1), 1980, 69-78
Copyright ( 1980 by Duke University Press

NOTES AND COMMENTS

Captain Gillespie and the 58 Anglophiles

of Buenos Aires in 1806

H. V. LIVERMORE

After the British conquest of Buenos Aires General Beresford

invited the citizens to take the oath of allegiance to King George.
The names of those who did so, if we had them, would certainly shed
some light on the antecedents of the May revolution. According to
Captain Alexander Gillespie of the Royal Marines, whom Beresford
had made commissary for prisoners, they numbered 58. Unfortunately
the list has disappeared. In the Gleanings and Remarks Collected
during Many Months Residence at Buenos Ayres and within the Upper
Country, which Gillespie published at Leeds in 1818, with a second
edition in the following year, we are told that he brought the document
back to England and presented it to the government. Much effort
has gone into the quest for it. The Argentine historian, Lieutenant
Colonel Carlos Roberts, who combed the British archives very thor-
oughly for his work Las invasiones inglesas, published in 1938, found
no trace of it and, though he accepted that it had existed, concluded
that Gillespie's claim to have presented it to the Foreign Office in 1810
was an attempt to blow up his owvn services in order to support claims
for recognition.'
Twenty years later, in November 1958, Dr. Miguel Carcano of the
Argentine Academy of History wrote to Professor R. A. Humphreys of
University College, London, requesting that search be made in Oxford,
but neither the Bodleian nor any of the Oxford colleges had the paper.
However, Argentine documents showed conclusively that Gillespie had
it in 1807, and Professor Humphreys was able to tell Dr. Carcano that
a strange coincidence had brought him into possession of the receipt

* The author is Professor of Spanish and Portuguese in the Department of

Hispanic and Italian Studies at the University of British Columbia.
1. Roberts, Las invasiones inglesas (Buenos Aires, 1938).

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 70 HAHR I FEBRUARY I H. V. LIVERMORE
acknowledging Gillespie's deposit in 1810. It was contained in a book
sent to him twenty years ago by a bookseller in Guernsey.
Again twenty years later, in 1978, I had occasion to examine the
correspondence with Gillespie, now at the Public Record Office, Kew,
and also came across a memorial from him. to a later Prime Minister,
Lord Liverpool, presented in 1823 with an outline of his services and
a request for recognition. Although the list or lists have not come to
light (if they still exist), this material shows that despite Gillespie's
vaunting style his statements are generally true as far as they can be
verified, and that Roberts was, for once, incorrect.
In his memorial Alexander Gillespie tells us that he was one of the
five sons of Principal Gillespie of St. Andrews, a former royal chaplain.
They all entered the armed forces, and Alexander embarked as a marine
on the Monarch on October 31, 1778. He was put on half-pay in 1803
and offered his services on the resumption of hostilities. He was finally
accepted by Sir Home Popham who took him on board the Diadem for
the expedition to reoccupy the Cape of Good Hope in 1805. Gillespie
landed with the army and after the short campaign was placed in
charge of a detachment to guard prisoners. In April 1806, he sailed
with the Diadem on Popham's buccaneering expedition to Buenos
Aires, where he was "auxiliary" to its capture, being "without solicita-
tion or expectation appointed commissary for prisoners by the present
Lord Beresford."
The appointment ran from the day of the conquest, June 27. It
fell to Gillespie to register the Spanish officers who gave their parole
rather than be sent to England. He also kept the record of those
individuals who were willing to become British subjects. The signatures
were given at his lodgings, the Inn of the Three Kings, some perhaps
furtively, under cover of darkness. When Liniers recovered the city
on August 11, Gillespie became a prisoner himself. In the Gleanings,
he tells us of his experiences, not unpleasant, at San Antonio de Areco.
In January 1807, as Aucbmuty prepared to take Montevideo, the British
captives were moved up-country. Beresford made his escape, but
Gillespie spent several weeks in the foothills of the Andes at Cala-
machita.
After Auchmuty took Montevideo in February 1807, the military
authorities in Buenos Aires became interested in the lists, wishing to
know who had given parole and who had joined the enemy. In the
Gleanings, Gillespie tells us that Liniers sent orders to seize the lists
and mentions the arrival of a Captain Martinez from whom he con-
cealed them. Captain Martinez carried two papers which sunmnoned

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 58 ANGLOPHILES OF BUENOS AIRES 71

Gillespie to "deliver up the book containing the signatures of parole

from the Spanish officers who became prisoners at the capture of
Buenos Aires by the English.... These two documents in the Spanish
original are now in the Transport Office"-that is, Liniers' orders. Two
drafts from the Argentine National Archive confirm Gillespie's stoiy.
The first, marked reservado, is addressed to Dn. Juan del Pino Man-
rique.

Se qe el Quaderno de Juramentados para en poder del Comisdo

de Prisioneros, qe parece serlo Dn. Alexandro Gallespie. Sea qfn
fuere, 7m mafiosamente le sorprehenderai, y sin perderlo de vista
entregar4 el oficio incluso, qe leera Vm pa imponerse de su
obgeto, y si a pesar de mi cibilidad se escusase, valiendose de la
fuerza reconocera sus papeles, y hallando dho Quaderno le
dexara Vm el resguardo circunstanciado qe le pidiese, y me lo
remitira en primera ocasion segura.
Dios gue a Vm ma as.
En Bs. Ayres, AbI 27, 807

The accompanying summons to Gillespie ran:

Es absolutamente indispensable q0 Vrm entregue el Quaderno

de Juramentos prestados por los oficiales y demans al tpo de la
rendicion de la capital de Buenos Ayres, y respecto a qe a con-
tinuacion de esta orden, le dara a Vm recibo el Comisdo Dn. Juan
del Pino en qe expresar' la foliacion util, y demas circunstas qe
Vm exija, espero qe no sera menester mas, pa qV Vm se preste a su
entregue, bajo el seguro de qea su tpo se le devolvera.
Dios gue a Vnm mos aos
Bs. As En Abl 27 1807 Snr D. Alexandro Gallespie

Martinez promised Gillespie that if he handed over the document,

it would be returned. Gillespie denied having it, and said that he
would only give up the key to his "potak," or petaca, if forced to do
so. In view of his continued refusal, Martinez took him aside and
pointed out that he could not appear to fail in his duty in front of his
own men. He would have to be permitted to feel inside the petaca.
And if he found the document he would have no alternative but to
seize it. The solution wvas not hard to find. With the help of a lieu-
tenant of marines, Martinez was able to search the wrong box on the
well-known principle of obedezco, pero no cumplo. There wNTas, of
course, no difficulty in supplying him with letters certifying that he
had carried out his instructions. In the Gleanings, Gillespie prints a
letter he says he addressed to Liniers on June 6, 1807, declaring that
he had placed the documents in a safe place: "should the Diadem ever
fall into your hands, perhaps you may find them there."

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
72 HAHR I FEBRUARY I H. V. LIVERMORE
As a result of Whitelocke's capitulation after the events of July 5,
all prisoners were released. The news reached Gillespie on July 31,
and a few days later he started on the long journey to the coast, reach-
ing Buenos Aires early in September. He hired a launch to get to
Montevideo, arriving in Britain at the end of 1807.
On reaching Ireland, Gillespie purchased some linen, which was
seized by the English customs for non-payment of duty. He wrote a
series of letters to the Treasury but failed to get a refund. He pre-
sumably received his modest share of the Buenos Aires prize money.
At the Cape, Popham had made a private agreement with Baird and
Beresford to divide the eighth reserved for commanding officers. He
later made agreements with Beresford and with his own captains. It
was they who now challenged Popham's claim. In a suit brought by
Ross Donnelly of the Narcissus, Sir J. Mansfield ruled that Popham's
rank was captain, not commodore, and that he was not entitled to claim
a commanding officer's share. Baird was, although he had never left
the Cape. Popham seems to have thought of suing Beresford-at least,
Beresford, now marshal of the Portuguese army and in the thick of
the peninsular war-told his brother or reports to this effect although
he did not see how Popham could make out a case.
Except for the delays, this perhaps did not affect Gillespie, who,
however, had his own grievance. As a locally appointed staff officer
at Buenos Aires, he was entitled to additional pay of ten shillings a
day. He claimed 559 days, from the date of his appointment until his
return to England. In support of this, Gillespie applied to Beresford
for a certificate. He replied from Fornos de Algodres in Portugal on
May 12, 1810.

I certify that I appointed Capt. Alexr Gillespie of the Royal

Marines Commissary for Prisoners in the Town of Buenos Ayres
on the 27 of June 1806, in which capacity he served till the fall
of the Place on the 12 of August following, when he marched a
prisoner up country, and having been released in the month of
September 1807, and ultimately arriving in England in the
December following, for which period it is presumed he is
entitled to the Staff Pay attached to such a situation,
signed W. C. Beresford, Head Quarters, Fornos de Algodres.
This certificate was accompanied by a letter from Lieutenant
Colonel Arbuthnot, who had been with Beresford at Buenos Aires and
was now his military secretary:

Sir,
I am directed by His Excellency Marshall Beresford to trans-
mit you the annexed certificate which is similar to those he has

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 58 ANGLOPHILES OF BUENOS ARES 73

already granted to the officers of the Army who had staff situa-
tions in South America and as the greatest part of them have
received the pay attached to the situation they held in the
Country His Excellency hopes that it will in a like manner be
granted to you by the Transport Board.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedt. and humble servant,
Robt. Arbuthnot, Lieut.-Col., Military Secretary

Had Gillespie been in the army these helpful recommendations

might have enabled him to win his point, but as a marine his fate
came under the Admiralty, of which the Transport Board formed a
dependency. The board rejected the claim.
But soon after Beresford sent his certificate, the May revolution
occurred in Buenos Aires, and the party of independence took power.
The news reached London on August 6, 1810. It at once suggested to
Gillespie a different approach. On August 8 he addressed a letter to
the Prime Minister, Spencer Perceval, "upon the subject of my being
the depositary of a record of perhaps useful reference to His Majesty's
government, as containing names who might one day appear con-
spicuous upon the annals of dynasty or war amongst the chequered
events in those convulsed colonies." He goes on to mention having
received the signatures of "fifty respectable inhabitants of Buenos Aires
expressive of their allegiance and attachment to the British Govern-
ment."2
The letter as preserved in the Record Office reads:

From my acquaintance with the Country and the genius of its

natives, I contemplate the late revolution at Buenos Aires as
introductory to a permanent government more enlightened in
its views and liberal in its principles than any one which has
preceded it. I contemplate the event as involving in its con-
sequences the commercial interests of my country, and notwith-
standing the documents as well as the ideas that arise from them
may be remote in their utility and object, still a future good may
proceed out of Both, and it is under this sanguine anticipation
I now do myself the honour of submitting them to your Notice.
Foreseeing the reconquest of Buenos Ayres, I had early con-
cealed underground the Books containing the paroles of the
Spanish officers whom we made prisoners upon its surrender
and the signatures of allegiance by many of its most respectable
inhabitants to the British government.
This was spontaneous on their part, and done at a crisis
holding out few motives of personal advantage, but on the con-

2. Gillespie, Gleanings and Remarks Collected during Many Months Residence

at Buenos Ayres and within the Upper Country (Leeds, 1818).

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
74 HAHR FEBRUARY I H. V. LIVERMORE
trary many perilous results under a reverse of fortune to them-
selves, their families and their properties. I therefore must
conclude that their intentions were pure and their regard for our
Nation sincere.
I beg, Sir, to represent to you that I am now in possession of
this Instrument, and when commanded shall with much pleasure
deposit it with you. It will identify to His Majesty's Ministers
the names of those men who in less happy times view'd us vvith
a friendly Eye and dared to attest their sentiments. It may serve
as a key to the general feelings of that community thro the
medium of those individuals whenever free discussion of recip-
rocal interests shall be allowed or an intercourse permitted.
I trust your liberal notions will ascribe this approach to its
true design-an anxious zeal to promote as far as I can the solid
and lasting good of our Island.

Gillespie subscribed himself "Captain, Royal Marines, formerly

Commissary of prisoners, South America." It is unlikely that Spencer
Perceval, then preoccupied by the ever increasing demands of Welling-
ton's army in the Peninsula, paid much attention to the letter. It passed
to the Foreign Office, then the domain of Henmy, Marquess of Welles-
ley, Wellington's brother. In his book Gillespie tells us that his
letter was soon followed by an order to lodge the instrument with the
under-secretary, William Richard Hamilton. 1Hamilton (1777-1859)
combined diplomacy with antiquarian research and was then the author
of a book on Egyptology inspired by the discovery of the Rosetta Stone;
he was later a trustee of the British Museum. The letter to Gillespie
has not been preserved in the Foreign Office records, but Gillespie's
reply has: It is dated Woolwich, September 3.

Sir,
I propose to do myself the honour of waiting on you upon
Tuesday first at half-past 12 o'clock with the book which con-
tains the signatures of allegiance by many of the commercial
inhabitants of Buenos Ayres while under British dominion.
Having had reference to these names, I observe from a com-
parison with the list of those who comprise the present rulers of
that City one gentleman Don Francisco Jose Castelli, standing
next in relation to Saavedra, the Chief. My remarks attached to
his subscription are the following-A very clever fellow, has
visited Europe and North America, speaks English fluently and
is well attached to this country-He is a native of Lima, and
has very comprehensive views of politics and commerce.
I feel happy that the loose suggestions which I did myself
the honour to submit to the Right Honourable Mr. Perceval have
been in my respect realized to me, and I doubt not but the record
deposited with you may prove of much future Benefit.

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
58 ANGLOPHILES OF BUENOS AIES 75

This letter is endorsed "Capt. Gillespie, D.R. Sept. 3 1810 a. Signatures

to the oath of allegiance at Buenos Ayres, 3208."
In his book Gillespie does not actually say that he saw Hamilton,
but he prints Hamilton's receipt:

Received this day, from the hands of Captain Alexander Gil-

lespie, of the Royal Marines, a book containing the oath of
allegiance to His Britannick Majesty, signed at Buenos Ayres in
the course of July 1806 by fifty-eight Inhabitants of that City,
together with the Paroles of Spanish and Creole Officers of the
Regular and Provincial army of Buenos Ayres, commencing the
1st day of July, 1806. The same to be deposited in the Foreign
Office
Signed W. R. Hamilton

There is no copy of this receipt in the Foreign Office records, but

the original turned up in a book sent to Professor Humnphreys many
years ago. He has kindly presented it to me. The text is as printed
by Gillespie, but for small differences of punctuation and capitalization.
Hamilton began to write "I" and then changed his mind, moving to
the following line to write "received," and "in the course of July"
replaces "on the fourth of July." Perhaps Hamilton asked when the
signatures were given and Gillespie replied with the date the list was
opened, correcting the slight misunderstanding for print. The receipt
is endorsed "No. 5. Mr. Hamilton Foreign Office, receipt for record
of officers and natives, B. Ayres, 4 Sept. 1810." The No. 5 does not
correspond to the Foreign Office's filing system and was Gillespie's
number. Presumably no copy was kept by Hamilton. Neither the
receipt nor the book itself was entered in the departmental daybook
or given a number.
Three weeks passed. Then on September 26 Gillespie appealed to
Hamilton for help in pressing his claim:

Craven Coffee House

Strand
26 Septr 1810

Sir,
Permit me the freedom of an appeal to your high knowledge
of official forms and transactions under my present case. About
to embark in a ship whose destination is most probably foreign
I shall be compelled to relinquish and perhaps forego the claims
with which the accompanying documents will attest to you I
hold against the Public. God knows they were most dearly
earned, and altho not exceeding ?276-10-0, still the sum seems
to me under my approaching destinies of peculiar importance,

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
76 HAHB I FEBRUARY I H. V. LIVERMORE
and still more so as I shall leave behind a wife and five children
far from living in independent circumstances.
The rest of my address to the Transport Board, the actual
source of application, and the proper Board, was unavailing
without any cause assigned, but I immediately had a reference
of the Treasury. Betwixt those departments I have exerted every
Energy, but without effect. From the latter I have solicited a
partial advance of seventy pounds to meet my present contin-
gencies, and until a final adjustment, but with like success.
Your liberal and comprehensive views will know that under
any event an officer must obey his orders and that devoid of
personal fortune his credit seldom stands high. Amidst all of my
difficulties, and many they have been, I trust my conduct has
ever risen above them. The occasion on which I venture to en-
large is another in my life which calls for all my firmness and
I take authority to glance at the outline when I thus unbosom
myself to a stranger.
I am aware of the delicacy requisite in taking counsel from
a Public Character upon a public question. Forgive me, Sir, for
a very free approach. In requesting your advice I derive no
warrant except from your generous feelings as a gentleman, and
your human consideration as a man.
I have the honour to be, Sir, with the respect which is due,
Your very faithful and most devoted humble servant,
Alexr. Gillespie,
Capt., Royal Marines
The documents attached are copies of Beresford's certificate and
Arbuthnot's covering letter.
Once more no copy has been preserved of Hamilton's approach
to the Transport Board. He was evidently in the habit of sending
personal notes which were not copied or entered. But the result is
seen from a reply he had from Sir Rupert George, dated from the
Transport Office, October 8, 1810.

Dear Sir,
Capt. Gillespie has appealed both to the Admiralty and
Treasury against the decision of the Board upon his claim. Capt.
Gillespie has been allowed 10/. per diem during the time he
officiated as Commissary of Prisoners of War which was from his
appointment to the capture of Buenos Ayres, but he claims Pay
during the time he was Prisoner of War and till his arrival in
England, which is unprecedented in the Naval Department, and
not likely to be allowed by the Admiralty.
I am, dear Sir,
very faithfully yours,
Rupt. George
The letter is endorsed "Sir Rupert George. D. Oct. 8. R. II, 1810.
answer on Capt. Gillespie. B. agrees."

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 58 ANGLOPILES OF BUENOS AIES 77

Here the correspondence ends and the trail grows cold. Gillespie's
last active service was in 1816, when he volunteered from the Bulwark,
flagship at Sheerness, to exchange with Captain Marshall into the
Albion to go to Algiers. In his memorial he tells Lord Liverpool that
before the battle he was confined to a sickbed, but was carried on
deck on a chair and for ten hours assisting in changing the direction
of the guns, a service which was "publicly and handsomely acknowl-
edged." He was landed at Gibraltar and returned to England. At his
own request, and aided by a medical report, he was retired on January
1, 1817, his departure being announced by General Winter before a
parade of officers at Chatham. He settled at Headingley, near Leeds,
where he published the Gleanings in 1818 and 1819. He offered his
services during the troubles of 1819, but they were declined. Finally,
he submitted his memorial to Lord Liverpool in June 1823, depicting
himself as beset with pecuniary difficulties and with the infirmities of
a broken constitution after nearly forty years of faithful service in
three wars and in every clime. He had four daughters, grown up but
unmarried, Mary Vischer, Isabella, Margaret Maitland, and Ann Norton
Gillespie. Considering how forlorn they must have been at his dis-
solution, he sought the protection of some charitable organization. In
his submission he does not now emphasize the delivery of the book of
signatures as a service, but claims that after his own captivity he had
"the joy of to rescue from an unrelenting proscription fifty-eight re-
spectable subjects of the Spanish Government who had secretly sworn
allegiance to the British Dynasty while it held the capital, by resisting
the surrender and afterwards concealing the attached records of that
deed from a military force which was specially directed by the ruling
authorities to wrest them" from him. Many officers who had signed
their paroles in the same volume were restrained from unsheathing
their swords against Britain by his firmness.
Hamilton must have been convinced of Gillespie's genuineness, or
at least of his plight, or he would hardly have taken up his case with
the Transport Board. He may have been less convinced that the
information it contained was as important as Gillespie claimed. The
contents were not passed on to the British agent in Buenos Aires, or so
far as I know turned to account in any way.
Gillespie had built up his case for its importance on a mistake.
His only note on a named individual was garbled. Although Roberts
thought that Gillespie had identified three members of the government
of 1810 on his list, the only one given by Gillespie is that of Castelli.
He had seen that the second member after Saavedra was Juan Jose
Castelli. In his letter he refers to him as "Dr. Francisco Castelli,"

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
78 HAHR I FEBRUARY I H. V. LIVERMORE
quoting his own note "a very clever fellow." Roberts accepted that
Castelli was intended, although rejecting Gillespie's decision.3
But not only is the name wrong: the description seems inapplicable
to Castelli. When eight years later Gillespie published the Gleanings,
he did not specify any of the 58 signatories, and had perhaps come to
realize his mistake.
It would seem likely that one name on the list may have been that
of Francisco Antonio de Cabello y Mesa, the former editor of the
Telegrafo Mercantil in 1802. The American Thomas Waine is said to
have taken a file of it to show to Popham at the Cape, and this may
have been the deciding factor in persuading Popham to embark on
his adventure, overcoming the doubts expressed by Baird. As a soldier,
Cabello held the rank of lieutenant-colonel; he came under suspicion
in April 1807, when orders were issued for the seizure of the parole
list from Gillespie. He was one of those who were captured by and
collaborated with the English at Montevideo, becoming one of the
editors of the famous but short-lived bilingual weekly La Estrella del
Sur/The Southern Star, first printed in May and closed after the seventh
issue in July, a casualty of Whitlocke's capitulation.
Cabello's name does appear on a parole list, the General Entry-
Book of Montevideo, 1807. He was apparently among those taken at
the storming of the town and is described as forty-three years of age,
5 feet, 31/2 inches in height, hair black, eyes dark, nose rather long,
complexion dark, person slender, marks or wounds none. He was one
of a batch of about 123 destined to be sent as prisoners to England.
Those most likely to succumb to Beresford's invitation were the
merchants who in the early days of the British conquest must have
anticipated great advantages from collaboration. Gillespie confirms
this when he speaks of the "signatures of allegiance of many of the
commercial inhabitants of Buenos Ayres." Cabello's connection with
the Telegrafo placed him much in contact with proponents of freer
trade and it seems probable that the lost list refers chiefly to men
who shared these views.

3. Roberts, Las invasiones, pp. 112-113.

This content downloaded from

120.148.41.174 on Sat, 09 Oct 2021 05:58:18 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms