Star.
London, England, 1810-02-28 00:00:00

Lordship's approllation ?--.1 was never called upon to give a dis-
tinct opinion upon the subject militarily.
Was it at any time proposed to your Lordship to carry into
execution that plan which had been so formed ? —lt was.
Had your Lordship undertaken on your part to carry that pro-
ject into execution ?—1 never understood the measure to have
been decided upon, it was a measure, I apprehend, upon which
the opinion of Sir David Dundas and the General Officers was re-
quired.
In your Lordship's narrative, you have sikted " Your Majesty
. .

" will permit me here to recall to your recollection the change
" which took place in the original projec: forun.d for the attack of
" Antwerp, and of the French fleet in the West Schcldt, in con-
" sequence of the opinions of the General and Staff Glazers, to
"whom this question was referred;" state to the Committee whe-
ther before the reference was made to the General Officers, your
Lordship had received his Majesty's commanth, through the Se-
cretary of State, to undertake the execution of that project ?
Certainly not, I never understood eveu that the project was decid-
.cd on.
Was your Lordship consulted by his Majesty's Ministers upon
the propriety of such a project as the one there referred to?-1 had
cmversations certainly with the Secretary of State upon it, but 1
knew that opinions were asked of Sir Darid Dundas and the Ge-
neral Officers upon it ; I never considered it as decided upon, but
merely a proposition made ; it had been the original proposal.
Was the opinion of your Lordship ast ed upon that project ?
Not formally asked as a General Officer.
• with who-

Does your Lordship know whom .
—1 do not feel that I can with propriety answer that question ; I
do not know that as a General Officer.
When was it first agreed that any notice should be taken of
Cadsand in the Expedition ?-1 really cannot state wch any pre-
cision, it arose out of the discusions upon it ; but I should think
rather early, I cannot state exactly, so many different projects
were arising every day, but I think it was pretty early after the
Expedition was decided on.
Does your Lordship realect it was a proposal at any time, and
a proposal somewhat decided upon, that Cadsand should be en-
tirely neglected tather think not after the Expedition was in
any forwardness; I rather think Cadsand was always insisted
upon, particularly by the Navy ; I understood so.
Did the importance of Cadsand appear greater the more it was
considered ; and was the force originally destined for that pur-
pose increased gradually till it came to the division of the Army
under Lord Huntley ?-1 rathet think the importance of it was
more felt every day by the Navy; great anxiety was expressed for
a considerable force being employed, but it is a midake to suppose
that the whole of Lord Huntley's division was destined for the ser-
vice of Cadsand; there v:as only one brigade destined for the ser-
vice of Cadsand, the other division was destined to make a diver-
sion near the*Knowle liatrery, at the same time I .ord Huntley had
directions, if necessary, to support the force that leaded on Cad-
sand ; but it was never expecaid it would require more than one
brigade at the most ; I fancy one regiment would have been suf-
ficient.
Was your Lcrdehip furnished with any intelligence of the
amount of force you might expect to find on Cads:nisi ?-- I think
that very much appears in the intelligence before the House ; it
was supposed to be extremely small.
Was your Lordship intnished with any intelligence of the
aintlut of force you might expect upon the Island of Walcheren
—Not further than as has been already before the House ; none
more precis:.
Is the date marked upon the intelligence presented by your
Lordship, viz. this :sth of October, correctly nrarktd ?--It Is.
Was that the time of its being. drawn up ? --It was in a great
measure drawn s,p at that time, and therefore it bears that date ;
I did not think it proper to deliver it at that time, it was not de-
livered of course till the 14th of February ; I had reasons for not
delivering it, but I thought it better to preserve the date at Which
it was in fact drawn up; there were after that time none but ver-
bal or critical alterations, I considered the report as fiaished on
that day.
Is this the call Narrative or Memorial, or Paper of any de-
scription, which has been delivered to his Majesty by your Lord-
ship on the subject of the 4xpedltitio 1.-4 hate stated • that this
paper was prepared as my report of my proceedings in the Scheldt,
and that it was delivered to his Majesty as such on the 14th of
February ; that is all 1 can state upon the subject of this paper
which is before the House.
Was there any other narrative, paper, manorial or memoran-
dum of any sort, delivered to his Majesty upon this subject by
four Lordship I- -I have already stated that this paper was pre-
pared on the I tth of October;. I am very ready to state, if it is
wished, the reason I did not deliver it then ; the reason I did not
deliver it was, that I did not think that it was right for me to
state, in face, what would constitute my defence in case of any
enquiry, whether civil or military, that was the reason I did nor
deliver it ; i did deliver it as my report of my proceedings, on the
14th of February ; that is all the explanation I can give on the
'subject of the paper that is before the House.
Was any other paper, narrative, memorial or memorandum of
any sort, *delivered to • his Majesty upon this subject by your
Lords Lip ?--This paper, which is now before the House, is my
official report of my proceedings ; when 1 am asked with respect
to any other paper, or to any other circumstances not cone eg un-
der that description, I do not feel myself at liberty to enter at all
into any examination of that sort, and I must beg to decline giv-
ing any answer to the question put to me.
sVlras the narrative now before the House submitted to nny of
his Majesty's Ministers, either officially or otherwise, previously
to its being delivered to his Majesty ?—Not previously, it was
submitted to the Cabinet the day that it was delivered to the
King.
Before or after its delivery ?---After.
Was any communitalion made by your Lordship to any of his
Majesty's Ministers of your intention to deliver smell a narrative
to the King previously to its being delivered i--It was delivered
after the Levee, I think I stated to several of his Majesty's Mi-
nisters, that I meant to deliver it that day.
Did your Lordship acquaint sevi ral of hi; Majesty's Ministers
at the Levee of your intention to deliver it previously to its being
delivered ?--I think I stated it merely in conversation, I meant to
deliver it myself to the Kirig, having received my instructions
under the Sign Manual, I thought it proper to present my report
immediately to the King, which was atterwarus laid before the
Cabinet.
Will your Lordship have the goodness to state which of his Ma.
lesty's Ministers were present at the Levee, and to which of them
your Lordship made the communicption ?--I really cannot recol-
lent, i btlieve most of the Ministers were there. 1 did not state
it to them in any official way, therefore it appeared very iinma-
terial whether I stated it or not.

that

anj that you were not consulted as a General Officer?—mot was
hardly consulted as a General Officer after my return. I ceased
to b in command of the Expedition in Zealand on the 25th of
September.
Was your Lordship consulted in your military capacity on the
propriety of retaining the Island of M'alcheren after yo.: Lord-
ship's return ?—1 think not ; not officially ; I was asked, some
questions connected with it, but I do not think I was asked any
distinct opinion upon It.
What were those questions your Lord:hip was asked
• quesriu

think there were some perhaps reppectin how far It
was defensible, with respect to the number of men it would re-
quire to garrison it, and some general questions upon the proba-
bility of an inundation, dthereut circumstances of that sort ; but
I du not think I was called upon militarily to state any distinct
opinion upon the subject; it is alluded to in some of My Dis-
patches, I think.
Did your Lordship in fact state, either asked or unasked, any
op:nion t.iion the propriety of retaining. thelsland of Walcheren ?
—1 was not called upon to make any report upon that subject,
which is the only way in which I can possibly consider I could
give an answer to the question.
Your Lordship did not of your own accord deliver any opinion
upon that paint as a military man ?-110, I did not.
Your Lorddlip has stated that your reasons for not delivering •
your narrative to the King earlier than the 14th of February
were, that you chose to reserve your defence till the time when
any military or other enquiry might take place; will your Lord-
ship state your reason for delivering it on the precise day of the

,rojeet originated ?

your'nsa etsil in yourrom Lordshipc`ountry had formed no plan or oper-tion: prior ta
g f this ?—No detailal plain of operations.
Did your Lordship on your arrival in the Scheldt, find ilk•
state of Antwerp and the preparations of the enemy in the field
and in the fortresses, such as was represented to your Letts' ip
to be the state of the enemy prior to your Lipdship's sailing from
this country ?—I gradually obtained information as well as I couia
of the state of the ene'my s force, and the state a' Autwo.p, I
not find any such information on my at rival in tht Scheldt.
Did yi* Lordship.: Curt ths.sta3; cbghlY'b To.:TrLsses

Antwerp mid on theScheldt; sad the eheaters foice at AntWe:lst
and in the neighbourhood of sflattivirp„.on your Lord,W.p's as
v 24; to correvondssitith ring repretteteed-to be the state of those
fortresses, and of that force, prior to your sailing front Englaial?
—I had no means or knowing the state of Antwerp ; on my
rival in the Scheldt, I obtained • gradually information us dka
subject:
Prior to youreLordship's sailing from Ergland, hail ycur Lord:
ship any intelligence a, to the *tate of Antwerp, ::;id the
of the enemy in Antwerp and its heighbvdthtiod ?—1 h c t‘s
more precise informatian epon that subject than what is tuniaintd
in the inteili;it-:ce that is before-the House.
1/11 yoar .I.Ordship tn.& thit Intelligerte correct?-1 do rot
know how to answer that question eaacity, or how ic, e••tt
ascertain whet/ter it .was Corti4l; is it meant to be asked wet;
then it was COM& at the time it was gtsu n,
Win ther the state in Which your Lordship found the tmen:y
and his fortresses on your arrival in the Scheldt, correspondei h
that rept misted tb your Lordship to be the state of the

ep ac.._ st ate ot enemy prof
4th of February ?—I had no particular reason for doing it on to your Lerdship leaving this country ?-1. did not find thl flay
that precise day, except that it happened to be a Levee day ; why arrival' any ioformation on this stfoj, et, I acquired nentjueiredmattoao;',
I wished to do it about that time was, that I conceived there was gradually of tit, strength of Antwerp and the t iterny's fo cr.
no objection at that time to my so doing, and besides that felt a Did such it:forenoon as your Lordship gradually a
desire that as 1 bad not been called' upon at that time to he ese ter your arrival there, correspond with the imormatiou previous!,
amined here, and that the Admiral had, my account of the pro- received here ?--I i•hteik it t entirely as to the state of Autwtte
ceedings in the Scheidt might in some way or other tome belore materially defier as to the omen ofeditstwesploljoei:ie
the public, and I knew that could not be done but by my deliver- that the inteWsence so far as it wente hot tioneedottely oa my
i git to the F iug. I here think it necessary to state In addition, rival but at a subsequent time, went to state that the Works of
tat one of the reasons why I wished for a cettain time to delay A.utwerp bad been put intodistate celdepaide
d:livering this report was, that I was in expectation that some ac- Does your Lot &hip believe that the. works of Antwerp, pare,
count of his proceedings would have .been delivered in by Sir ticularhe the citadel of Ar twerp, were net put into a owe of Le.
Richard Strachey; I had indeed understood that he had been -pair tudit e: the arrival of your lordship in the §cheldt?-4
called upon fur something of that sort; I know that with a view should fancy before that time, but I cannot speak correctly,
to it be had asked for particular reports and details of several of Had your Lordship any intellieenee beat& you soiled Bons
the Officers under him, I conceived he would be called upon to this country, that the guns of the citedel Autwerp immusne-
make some narrative of his proceedings, and I teas very anxious red what are called the arsenals et ,Ant weep ?eol believe 1 blue al.
that they should both come up precisely at the same time, that I ready answered that question, as tar ae lam enabkel to do it; I
should not state my narrative first before any statement was giveu lad no curtails intelligent& I believe up-nodl; subject.
in by him. Lid your Lordship expect when you sailed to find Antwerp in
From whom did your Lordship understand that Sir Richard a bad state of tieleoze, both as to its fortifications and its earn-
Strachan had been called upon for a narrative of his proceedings ? sot ?—el. great deed of the intelligence certainly went to that efface
—I did not knew it from any good authority; for probably the Did your Lordship issue soy private or conhdential ins:Metiers
thing would have taken place if I had. I allude to that which to the General Officers under your command?-1 cannot speak
was very generally understood. 1 knew that all the Officers un- positively, but. 1 apprehend the instructions, at least many of
der Sir Richard Strachau had been called upon for minute reports them, to the General Officers, are. upon the table of the Hook_
of their proceedings. 1 suppose I was mistaken, or probably a • Was your Lordship furnished with heavy artillery suitable to
report would have appeared, if it was railed for front him; but I the siege of Aariverp, in the event of its being ncaessary th in-
understood it from rumour, and I thought It probable. • dertake a siege independent of that used fur the siege co alue•
Was it merely from common rumour. and not from anyelfficial ing 1-1 cannot answer that question without knowing undtr
person, you had this report I—l do not think it was from any what circiteestances it is meant.
official person. Was your Lordship furnished, prior to your sailing from this
. ,
Or any one who had been an official person ?—i think not. country, wish-heavy ordnance, in the event of its being Neese:et
Or connected with any official person ?—No, I :Intik not. •to undertake the siege of Antwere ; bad you any ordineei: ,s ass
Did your Lordship believe at the time you delivered in that event to undertake that siege indepeudent of the ordeance ter tea
narrative to the King, that Sir Richard Strachan had delivered in siege of Flushing, sufficient to enable your Lordship to carry oa
a narrative of any sort ?—I did not ; I supposed certainly not. the two sieges at once if necessary ?-1 am afraid I cannot pte
Did your Lordship take any steps to conununicate to Sir fee:ly answer that question, without knowing what ciseten.
Richard Strachey that you intended to deliver, in such a mirra- stances are supposed by the-question; whether under the tiro:L.:-
tier ?—Certainly not ; I bad no communication with Sir Richard stance of Autweep being in a perfect state of defence, arid aid
S: reclean from the time I left the Scheldt. a sufficient and :Milne garrison, or under any other sue pesitioe
After the delivery of that narrative, did your Lordship take any I Under the Suppoaition either -of 4ittwerp being su atiintly
steps to communicate it to Sir Richard Strachan ?—Most c. r- garrisoned, and in a sufficient stateof defence, and that it wood
tainly not, nor should i have felt myself (if i had been incitned to be necessary to underake -a regular tieee, or was your Lordslep•
it) even justified in it. Ido not see on what possible ground I furnished with heavy wurttuo sufficieut tiebornband the curet,. in
could have communica'ed an official report made to the Ring. i the event of a bombardment being resorted to•i—That is e
believe it was moved fur the very day after it was delivered to the fesetenal question which Ido sorikilowl4,l,l to &newer, unless it
King ; therefore Sir Richard Streeter' would have it in that way. is accurately sta:e4; I diktisst periretly ritk the question.
Before your Lordship sailed upon the expedition, had -your • Was your I.mdship iter•iished with a sisfacieney of holey aril..
Lordship any consultation with one or more, or the whole of lery u. enable you to carry on the two operations, the one ageted
the General Officers employed ender you in the expedition to the Antwerp, and the other against. IJushiug, at the same lime ?--I
Scheldt ?-1 had a great deal of communication almost daily with had a sufficiency of heavy artillery in proportion to the strengthof
most of them that were within my reach ; I had no communise- • the army. =-1 certainly had nut a sufficiency u artillery (nor s
tion with the whole of them together; they never were In the it in contemplation) for the siege of the town and citadel of stn -
same place at the same time. I weep, eupposine, it to be In repair and sufficiently gerrisonol,
Did your Lordship know that there were under your commend such a siege could never have been in wince:ph:tied with rile
officers who had been at Antwerp in the course of service I—Yes, t army I commanded. I wish to add, that there tea; a sea:ernes! ,
I did. of orthiance in any case for bombardment; but in the event a
Did your Lordship consult with these officers individually or siege, the heavy ordnance for the Expedition eeelast AialTue
collectively on the subject of the expedition ?—I bad conversation was to be furnished.by the Navy.
with them or consulted with then' on the subject of the expedi- [His Lordship was direct to withdraw.
tion ; there were, I believe, one or two officers islio had been i The Chairman was -diessetwl to report progress; and ask
there leave to sit again.
Will your Lordship have the goodness to name who those offi-
cers were ?—Sir William Erskine had been there, I saw him at
Deal, and had some conversation with hint on the subject of the
enterprize and I believe General Grosvenor had been there, he
had been, I know, on the 'l' ete de Flandre, and I rather think he
was in Antwerp.
Did your Lordship ask or receive any opinion from the Gene-
ral Officers under your command, on the probability or improba-
bility of the success of the enterprise ?—it it very difficult to an-
swer that question ; if it iPsneant to ask whether I called upon
any General Officer to give me a report of his opinion on the pro-
bability or improbability of the enterprize, I certainly did not.—
I had a great deal of conversation whit different officers, but their
opinions must necessarily vary front time to time, according to in-
telligence and other circumstances.
Does your Lordship recollect a particular conversation with
Sir John Hope, at Deal or Ramseate, on the subject of the probe-
bitity of success or failure ?—I think I had a good deal of conver-
s.eien with Sir john Hope at Deal, on the general operations to
be pursued ; but I do not think that Sir John Hope stated to me
any distinct opinion one way or the other as to the probably suc-
cess or failure of the enterprise.
Did your lordship deliver to his Majestyeany other narrative,
memorial, paper, or memorandum, relative to the expedition to
the Scheldt, besides the one which is mho upon -the table of the
House of Commons ?-1 have said that I delivered, on the t 4th
of February, to his Majesty, my official report of my proceedings
in the Scheldt, and I must be under the necessity of persisting in
my determination of declining to answer any further question
upon that subject.
As Commander in Chief of the expedition to the Scheldt,
did your Lordship deliver to his Majesty. any other paper, nar-
rative -- ' tendons c that

DIED.
The Rev. Richard Chandler,D. D. Rector of Tilehurst, terks,
Vicar of Ll'orldliani, Tiants, and font:trig Fellow 0: .m4ge•ito
College' Ozlonl.
Rev. Henry Grieve, D. D. Senior Minister of the Ohl flinch
of Edinburgh, one of the Deans of the Chapel Royal, ar.dtt Chap,
lab in Ordinary to his Maj:fsty, for ;;;:tatiand. •
Rev. John Rose, M. A. Rector of ihnington, near I;chtstt9,,
and in Commission of the Pelee for the Counties of lott 14.4

Does your Lordship recollect that the concluding paragraph in
the instructions under the Sign Manual, runs thus: " during your
Lordship's continuance on thi, service, you are to send or cause
to be sent to us through one of our principal Secretaries of State,
constant accounts of all that passes; and you are to follow all suc►
orders and directions as we shall send you either under our Sign
Marius!, or through one of of our principal Secretaries of State ?
—Certainly ; and I acted always in strict conrurmity thereto.
Can your Lor,fihip state any reasons for having deviated from
the usual course under the usual instructions (as I s•tppose theist
to be) of delivering your narrative of such service through one of
the principal Secretaries of State ?—Being on the spot, I thought
it more proper, in the situation in which I stood, to make the re.
port myself to his Majesty; it would have been open is me, un-
der that instruction, to have made it through the secretary of
State, but I felt it more proper to do as I did, and that it should
go to the Secretary of State aftetw►ards.
Did your Lordship make any written communications by way
of narrative or otherwise, of what had passed under your Lord.
ship's command in the Expedition to the Scheldt to hi. Majesty's
principal Secretary of State on your return ?--I did not, I thought
my dispatches were sufficient.
W- -- narrative

•
Somerset.
Rev. John Heathfielci, of Northew. Herta, aped 75., • •
i Rev. Neville Stow, Fellow cf. D 4wici college, aged.7s.
At 11'estou House, near Sit:mouth, .1. Sitickey, ksq.
He has left £6ouo per ann. to B. nartlett, 1.-sq. of the l'o,t-Olico.
Mr. Stuckey has likewise left £3OOO per,-asus. to ano:her
1 V. Stuckey, I sq. t f the Treasury.
Mr. Kitinart..,Apotheary, of Chtliea.
At Sheerness, Captain Edward Bass, o the alitatstalt.
At Mania, the t nth July, tit 9, Liet Utv.stßeorge:Cheyne, tt.
the lion,bay European ite.itnent, in consequence os his wecn
in storming the Fort of dallia, which Has given tirtitection t. a
tribe of banditti, for some time past,, who have Flotidertd tito
mighbouring dcpenaencies of our ally the Givicwoa.

IMPOEUI'AbI.I2 Dl:let/VERY.
THE Advantage the Public must always derive
from regularly educated professional men directing airucr4
eaclusively their studies to one speekA al malady, was never more
clearly demonstrated than by the .uitt sampled success whim has
attended the administration of their new remedyfand the extra,n-
(Unary cures it has performed. For a long series of years Messrs:
his M ,serrice,kol/1

or mentorandiun respoeting- the opc.--, of , expedi-
tion, besides the narrative now on the tableof the House of Coin,
mons ?—1 can give no other answer than I have already ; I have
stated that I delivered my report, akCommander of the expedi-
tion, to the King on the 14th of Fehru•iry,
Upon what grounds does your Lordship refuse to answer the
question just proposed ?—1 decline answering the question :—1
have stated all I did in my military capacity, which is, that I de-
livered my official report to the King on the I 4th of February ;
on the contents of that report I am ready to give any information.
I understood your Lordship to say, that your military capacity
ended on the ‘2.sth of Stptember, when your 'Lordship landedsat
Deal ?—No, not my military capacity ; that which T. stated as to
my military capacity as Commander of the forces ceasing, was
with reference to questions as to the defense of Waicheren ;
do not apprehend that my military capacity ceased, but I conceive
that I continued equally amenable to any Court of Inquiry, or any
Court Martial.
Does your Lordship-refuse to answer the question just propos-
ed on the ground of your being a privy Councillor I—l refuse it
generally. I decline answering the question.
Did not the capture or destructicr of the enemy's fleet fm,
one of the material 'leas of the expedition * t+Tit

Cu R Rt= and Cb. Surgeons, formerly to iajest
made the Venereal Disease the particular object tif their ii:wczi-
glition, and are happy in having discovered a medicine surtior to
mercury, in the cure of that complaint ; it is sufficient to obs,Tvr,
that the effects of this remedy ate diametrically opposite to those
of mercury, for thot%.h it completely eradicates every ve,tige of
the virus, in its most confirmed stages, yet it does not ip the La 4
injure the conritution ; on the contrary, it renovates ese ty,tern
•ip all its natural functions, promotes appetite, and facilitctes 41
gestion; thus instead of reducing a Str.e:g and rigorous cousti:u-
Linn to the fright...el condition that mercury does, it not only pro"'
serves that coniikution in its primitive state but restores a we ti
and debilitated one to its natural strength and vigour. Nunih:r. '
less instances are on recant record of the superior efficacy of the
medicine, its inherent and specific virtues acting as a petpetud
corrective to bodily debility, whether proce4ing front an excess•
of conjugal or Illicit pleasure, or from the more intidiorset!ds,sh
not less destructive, indulgence of incautious youth of hash •et.el.
itt a certain pernicious habit. Amidst the meiaocholy varlet:.
disorders which are t he consequence of this solitary vice, tfi,,re art!
none more affl ctiog than that distressing state of debility and :e
ficiency which prevents or enibitters the matrimonial st..te; rn!
• sufferer broods his - "*. Mistimed to *eel,.

.as any . ...tare or report required by any of his Majesty's . objects of ti to the Scheldt f,--It anhappy . over ~. mitifuststne.
Ministers of your Lordship after your return ?--No, none, certainly did. It was so described in the instructions. Ea, until he is reduced to such a state of wpaknes- as 1Q n44'11.
.
Was your Lordship asked officially by his Majesty's Ministers, Did your Lordship know, prior to your sailing from togland, life oppressive. To such persons it nitt•it he a consoliNT f, Bet%
after your return, for any account of your proceedings beyond that the French fleet could put Itself ander the protection of the lion to know, that they may now, bY'' trek,' infailtble 'node of
what had been conveyed in the dispatches of the F.xpedition under batteries at Antwerp t--I had no very precise information cam- treatment, beii
restored to that greatest -tif ail huttienblessings, 3
your Lordship's command ?—I was not. municated to me upon that subject; it was rather a naval question. strong, manl and vigorous constitution. - •
Does your Lordship. recollect the circumstance of an Address •In the event that your Lordship should find, on your arrival, iln all cases of debility, deficiency, f,narn-what;ver cause aridr7,
presented by the City of London to his Majesty cut the subject of the fleet had so put itself in protection under the citadel of Mt-, gjt yrell as in every speak-s of vener- A 'nfrrtkin, Messrs. Cure
the Expedition to the Scheldt ?---I do perfectly; and I believe-the werp, and that your Lordship should find the citadel and the ind Co. may be consulted by patients of 'either sell with me
letter which I wrote in consequence is before this Houle. town of Antwerp in a st.tte of defence, had your Lordship hi this greatest secrecy, and honour, at their house, No. 107, Hatton-
'Was "Was your Lordship consulted by soy of his Majesty's Mini. country formed any determination us to what weirs to,be year Uarden. Patients in the country, describing the parficalars.l.
I
seers previously to the answer given by his Majesty to that Ad- toordship's operations under those circumstances ? i have before their complaints, by letter post paid, enclosing a Bank note, 1v!11
dress, upon the satisfaction he had felt with both the services fad that no precise plan of operation was fixed upon before I have the necessary medicine and advice sent to any part of the
upon the Expedition to the Scheldt ?—I should have no (11%0y left this country ;it must have depended entirely upon cireum- kinedoru. 1. No 107 Hatton-Garden.
in answering that question. 1 have some doubts cdte as lkt Its Stances and the intelligence when we arrived.
propriety, as that question cannot be asked afite as a tallitegi In the'event of your Lordship's finding the enemy in posses.
man I bad ceased to he in the counaland 1 L *as unser asked I sion of no army ready to take the field against your Lordship's
officially any question upon it. I believe, that by my letter, which 1 army, but in a state of defence in .Antwerp, had your Lordship
is upon the table here,,it will be seen that I was noilarty at all; I formed any determination as Co your operation, whether you ,
that I was -not priisent at auydiscprision whantter reFincting. the . would, in order to 'destroy the Bees, sas one of dm great oh- 1
answerAu that address. • . jects,besiegp Antwerp ?—1 had formed no determination laetrile I,
When did your Lordship apprehend your command to teats, watt; as I said, that must depend upon circumstance at the lane;

- -
HIGH WitTElt AT LONDON /MUDGE ID.NIOILROW.
Mon
Attentian-.. ... 3t,* ninuers

. _
-15114M14 ~.c.: Printed and published by LEVEL KENT, of CIA,
fer.ury-riate, Lambeth it the STAu-Or►•iesl Ho: I; Corti,'
street. Published also it the STAit•Orsicsfirervple "•.